This article presents a collaborative inquiry analysis of the school improvement experiences of four persistently low-performing schools. It draws on the experiences of three members of the Laboratory for the Design and Redesign of Schools (LDRS) consortium who helped during their planning for restructuring or restructuring phases and one regional official who oversaw their grant support and school improvement interventions. The authors explore the role of organizational change to improved teaching and learning in the schools. The schools' mixed leadership and organizational capacity and belief in their teaching efficacy limited the benefits of state, district, and regional supports and resources, which school leaders were ill-equipped to coordinate. Combining leadership and organizational development with curricular and instructional reform models would be more promising.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational learning II. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Bray, J., Lee, J., Smith, L., & Yorks, L. (2000). Collaborative inquiry in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Brown, K.M., Anfara, V.A., Jr., & Roney, K. (2004). Student achievement in high performing, suburban middle schools and low performing, urban middle schools: Plausible explanations for the differences. Education and Urban Society, 36(4), 428-456.
5.
Burke, W.W. (2002). Organizational change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
The Commission on No Child Left Behind (NCLB). ( 2007). Beyond NCLB: Fulfilling the promise to our nation's children . Aspen, CO: The Aspen Institute .
7.
Cooperrider, D., & Sekerka, L.E. (2003). Towards a theory of positive organizational change . In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. AUTHOR: PLS. INCLUDE PAGE RANGE). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler .
8.
Corallo, D., & McDonald, D.H. (2002). What works with low-performing schools: A review of research. Charleston, WV: AELAUTHOR: PLS. SPELL OUT ACRONYM.
9.
DuFour, R. (2004). Schools as learning communties. Educational leadership, 61(8), AUTHOR: PLS. INCLUDE PAGE RANGE.
10.
Duke, D. (2006). What we know and don't know about improving low-performing schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(6), AUTHOR: PLS. INCLUDE PAGE RANGE.
11.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12.
Garcia, S.B., & Guerra, P.L. (2004). Deconstructing deficit thinking: Working with educators to create more equitable learning environments. Education and Urban Society, 32(2), 150-168.
13.
Glidden, H.G. (1999). Breakthrough schools: Characteristics of low-income schools that perform as though they are high-income schools. ERS Spectrum, 17(2), 21-26.
14.
Housman, N., & Martinez, M.R. (2001). A brief for practitioners on turning around low-performing schools: Implications at the school, district and state levels. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform.
15.
Louis, K.S., & Kruse, S.D. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
16.
Louis, K.S., & Marks, H.M. (1996). Schoolwide professional community. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (Vol. AUTHOR: PLS. INCLUDE VOLUME NUMBER, pp. 179-203). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17.
Malen, B., Croninger, R., Muncey, D., & Redmond-Jones, D. (2002). Reconstituting schools: "Testing" the "theory of action." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 113-132.
18.
Marks, H.M., & Printy, S.M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.
19.
May, H., Supovitz, J.A., & Perda, D. (2004). A longitudinal study of the impact of America's Choice on student performance in Rochester, New York, 1998-2003. Philadelphia: The Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
20.
Mintrop, H., & Trujillo, T.M. (2005). Corrective action in low performing schools: Lessons for NCLB implementation from first-generation accountability systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives , 13(48), 1-30.
21.
Muijs, D., Harris, A., Chapman, C., Stoll, L., & Russ, J. (2004). Improving schools in socio-economically disadvantaged areas-A review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(2), 149-175.
22.
Neuman-Sheldon, B. (2006). Building on state reform: Maryland school restructuring . Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
23.
New York State Education Department. (n.d.). 100.2. General school requirements. (p) Registration of schools and school/district accountability. Retrieved AUTHOR: PLEASE INCLUDE MONTH DAY, 2007, from http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/part100/pages/1002d.html#registration%20review%20process
24.
Nicolaidou, M., & Ainscow, M. (2005). Understanding failing schools: Perspectives from the inside. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(3), 229-248.
25.
Office of New York City School Improvement and Community Services. (n.d). Registration review visit procedures. How to conduct registration review visits. A guidebook for reviewers, SED liaisons and review team leaders. Albany, NY: The State Education Department.
26.
Orr, M.T., Byrne-Jimenez, M., McFarlane, P., & Brown, B. (2005). Leading out from low-performing: Learning to and transforming through the urban principalship. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 23-54.
27.
Phenix, D., Siegel, D., Zaltsman, A., & Fruchter, N. (2005). A forced march for failing schools: Lessons for the New York City Chancellor's District. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(40), 1-27.
28.
Picucci, A.C., Brownson, A., Kahlert, R., & Sobel, A. (2002). Driven to succeed: High-performing, high-poverty, turnaround middle schools: Vol. 1. Cross-case analysis of high-performing, high-poverty, turnaround middle schools. Austin: University of Texas, Charles A. Dana Center.
29.
Portin, B., Beck, L., Knapp, M., & Murphy, J. (2003). Self-reflective renewal in schools. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
30.
Reason, P. (1988). Human inquiry in action. London : Sage.
31.
Schein, E.H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32.
Stringfield, S., Datnow, A., Ross, S.M., & Snively, F. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring in multicultural, multilingual contexts: Early observations from Sunland County. Education and Urban Society, 30(3), 326.
33.
Teddlie, C., & Stringfield, S. (1993). Schools make a difference: Lessons learned from a 10 year study of school effects. New York: Teachers College Press.
34.
Watts, M.J., Campell, H.E., Gau, H., Jacobs, E., Rex, T., & Hess, R.K. (2006). Why some schools with Latino children beat the odds and others don't. Tempe: Arizona State University.
35.
Weick, K.E. (2001). Making sense of the organization. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
36.
Weick, K.E. (2003). Positive organizing and organizational tragedy . In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. AUTHOR: PLS. INCLUDE PAGE RANGE). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler .
37.
Williams, T., Kirst, M., Haertel, E., et al.: Author: PLS. LIST ALL COAUTHORS. (2005). Similar students, different results: Why do some schools do better? A longitudinal survey of California elementary schools serving low-income students. Mountain View, CA: EdSource.
38.
Willmott, R. (1999). Structure, agency, and school effectiveness: Researching a "failing" school. Educational Studies, 25(1), 5-18.
