This article reviews the literatures on the characteristics of effective schools, classrooms, and instructional processes. Central findings from these literatures are summarized, as are important cautions in interpreting this knowledge base. The implications for special education of the effectiveness literatures are discussed. It is the position of the authors that both special and regular educators can learn much from recent research in order to design more powerful and integrated instructional programs for students with special needs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmorD. J.Conry-OsegueraP.CoxM.KingN.McConnellL.PascalA.PaulyE., & ZellmanG. (1976). Analysis of the school referred reading program in selected Los Angeles minority schools (Report No. R-2007-LAUSD). Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.
2.
AustinG. R. (1979). Exemplary schools and the search for effectiveness. Educational Leadership, 37, 10–14.
3.
BerlinerD. C. (1984). The half-full glass: A review of research on teaching. In HosfordP. L. (Ed.), Using what we know about teaching (pp. 51–77). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
4.
BloomB. S. (1980). The new direction in educational research: Alterable variables. Phi Delta Kappan, 61, 382–385.
5.
BrookoverW. B., & LezotteL. W. (1979). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement.East Lansing: Michigan State Univ., Institute for Research on Teaching.
6.
BrookoverW. B., & SchneiderJ. M. (1975). Academic environments and elementary school achievement. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 9(1), 82–91.
7.
BrophyJ. (1983). Classroom organization and management. Elementary School Journal, 83, 265–286.
8.
CarlbergC., & KavaleK. (1980). The efficacy of special versus regular class placement for exceptional children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Special Education, 14, 295–309.
9.
CegelkaW. J., & TylerJ. (1970). The efficacy of special class placement for the mentally retarded in proper perspective. Training School Bulletin, 66, 33–66.
10.
CicirelliV. G.EvansJ. W., & ShillerJ. S. (1970). The impact of Head Start: A reply to the report analysis. Harvard Educational Review, 40, 105–129.
11.
ClarkD. L.LottoL. S., & McCarthyM. M. (1980). Secondary source study of exceptionality in urban elementary schools. In Why do some urban schools succeed? (pp. 143–210). Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
12.
ClarkT., & McCarthyD. P. (1983). School improvement in New York City: The evolution of a project. Educational Researcher, 12(4), 17–23.
13.
ColemanJ. S.CampbellE. Q.HobsonC. J.McPartlandJ. M.MoodA. M.WeinfieldF. D., & YorkR. L. (1966). Equality of Educational opportunity.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Education.
14.
CooleyW. W., & LeinhardtG. (1980). The instructional dimensions study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2(1), 7–25.
15.
DossD., & HolleyF. (1982). A cause for national pause: Title I school wide projects (ORE Publication No. 8155). Austin, TX: Austin Independent School District, Office of Research and Evaluation.
16.
EdmondsR. (1979). Some schools work and more can. Social Policy, 9 (2), 28–32.
17.
EdmondsR. (1982). Programs of school improvement: An overview. Educational Leadership, 40(3), 4–11.
18.
EdmondsR., & FrederiksenJ. R. (1978). Search for effective schools: The identification and analysis of city schools that are instructionally effective for poor children.Cambridge: Harvard University, Center for Urban Studies.
19.
FrechtlingJ. (1983, April). Problems in evaluating school effectiveness: A shopping list of dilemmas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
20.
GageN. L. (1983). When does research on teaching yield implications for practice?Elementary School Journal, 83, 492–496.
GlassG. V. (1983). Effectiveness of special education. Policy Studies Review, 2, 65–78.
23.
GlassG. V.CahanL. S.SmithM. L., & FilbyN. N. (1982). School class size: Research and policy.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
24.
HellerK. A.HoltzmanW. H., & MessickS. (1982). Placing children in special education: A strategy for equity.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
25.
HunterM. (1984). Knowing, teaching, and supervising. In HosfordP. L. (Ed.), Using what we know about teaching (pp. 169–192). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
26.
Idol-MaestasL. (1983). Special educators consultation handbook.Rockville, MD: Aspen Publications.
27.
KavaleK. A., & GlassG. V. (1982). The efficacy of special education interventions and practices: A compendium of meta-analysis findings. Focus on Exceptional Children, 15(4), 1–14.
28.
LeinhardtG.BickelW. E., & PallayA. (1982). Unlabeled but still entitled: Toward more effective remediation. Teachers College Record, 84(2), 391–422.
29.
LeinhardtG., & PallayA. (1982). Restrictive educational settings: Exile or haven?Review of Educational Research, 52, 557–578.
30.
LeinhardtG.ZigmondN., & CooleyW. W. (1981). Reading instruction and its effects. American Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 343–362.
31.
LloydJ. W. (1984). How shall we individualize instruction—or should we?Remedial and Special Education, 5(1), 7–15.
32.
MacKenzieD. E. (1983a). Research for school improvement: An appraisal of some recent trends. Educational Researcher, 12(4), 5–17.
33.
MacKenzieD. E. (1983b). School effectiveness research: A synthesis and assessment. In DuttweilerP. C. (Ed.) Educational productivity and school effectiveness.Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
34.
MadausG. F.AirasianP. W., & KellaghanT. (1980). A reassessment of the evidence: School effectiveness.New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
35.
MaddenN. A., & SlavinR. E. (1983). Mainstreaming students with mild academic handicaps: Academic achievement and social outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 53, 519–569.
36.
MeyenE. L., & LehrD. H. (1980, March). Least restrictive environments: Instructional implications. Focus on Exceptional Children, 12(7), 1–8.
37.
OddenA., & DoughertyU. (1982). State programs of school improvement: A 50-state survey.Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
38.
PurkeyS. C., & SmithM. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. Elementary School Journal, 83, 427–452.
39.
ReynoldsD. & SullivanM. (1981). The effects of school: A radical faith restated. In GillhamB. (Ed.), Problem behavior in the secondary school.London: Croom Helm.
40.
RosenshineB. V. (1983). Teaching functions in instructional programs. Elementary School Journal, 83, 335–352.
41.
RowanB.BossertS. T., & DwyerD. C. (1983). Research on effective schools: A cautionary note. Educational Researcher, 12(4), 24–31.
42.
RutterM.MaughanB.MorimoreP.OustonJ., & SmithA. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
43.
SemmelM.GottliebJ., & RobinsonN. (1979). Mainstreaming: Perspectives on educating handicapped children in the public schools. In BerlinerD. (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 7). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
44.
StrainP. S., & KerrM. M. (1981). Mainstreaming of children in schools: Research and programmatic issues.New York: Academic Press.
45.
TrismanD. A.WallerM. I., & WilderG. (1976). A descriptive and analytic study of compensatory reading programs: Final report, Vol. 11. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
46.
VenezkyR. L., & WinfieldL. F. (1979). Schools that succeed beyond expectation in teaching (Studies in Education Technical Report No. 1). Newark: University of Delaware.
47.
WeberG. (1971). Inner-city children can be taught to read: Four successful schools.Washington: Council for Basic Education.
