This study questions the basic educational change strategy employed by the Office of Education and other top policy groups for the last several years. The implication is that educational change is more dependent on the internal workings of the school district than on feeding carefully engineered products to practitioners.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Campbell, Donald T., Stanley, Julian C.Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963.
2.
2. Clark, David L., Guba, Egon G."An Examination of Potential Change Roles in Education."Seminar on Innovation in Planning School Curriculum, October 1965.
3.
3. Eichholz, Gerhard C."Why do Teachers Reject Change?"Theory into Practice, Vol. II, No. 5, December, 1963, pp. 264-268.
4.
4. Evans, Richard I.Resistance to Innovation in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970.
5.
5. Guba, Egon. "The Change Continuum and its Relation to the Illinois Plan for Program Development for Gifted Children." Paper presented at a conference on Educational Change, March 1966.
6.
6. Havelock, Ronald G.et. al.Planning for Innovation Through Dissemination and Utilization of Knowledge. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, University of Michigan, July, 1969.
7.
7. Kuhn, Thomas S.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, 1962.
8.
8. Rogers, Everett M.Diffusion of Innovations. New York. The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964, pp. 81-86.
9.
9. Sarason, Seymour B.The Culture of the School and the Problems of Change. New York: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971.
10.
10. Steele, Joe M., House, Ernest R., Lapan, Stephen, Kerins, Thomas. Instructional Climate in Illinois Gifted Classes. Urbana, Illinois: Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation, University of Illinois, 1970.
