Schools with at-risk students can improve when district norms support school-based improvement efforts. The authors (a) studied a district's norms from a rural school leader's perspective and (b) examined the impact of these norms upon the school's revitalization goals. Data were collected through interview, observation, mining of documents, and the Group Development Assessment instrument. The five district norms (lack of district vision/focus, board and central office control orientation and lack of trust, blaming others/defensiveness, constant personnel turnover, and poor communication) were obstructive to achieving school goals. Despite progress made by school leaders in improving both the parent-teacher relationships and teacher work climate, the prognosis for achieving the crucial goal, redesigning instruction as more meaningful and engaging for high-risk students, seemed doubtful. Improving schools for at-risk students needs a normative environment engineered by a change-and-empowerment model binding the district to school improvement efforts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ApplebeeA. N., LangerJ., and MullisI. V. S.1989. Crossroads in American Education: A Summary of Findings.Princeton, NJ: Author.
2.
BerlinerD., and BiddleB.1995. The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on America's Public Schools.New York: Addison-Wesley.
BraceyG.1996. “International Comparisons and the Condition of American Education,”Educational Researcher, 25(1): 5–11.
5.
Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.1986. A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the 21st Century.New York: Author.
6.
ClarkD. L., LottoL. J., and AstutoT. A.1984. “Effective Schools and School Improvement: A Comparative Analysis of Two Lines of Inquiry,”Educational Administrative Quarterly, 20(3): 41–68.
7.
ColemanP., and LaRocqueL.1990. Struggling to be “Good Enough”: Administrative Practices and School District Ethos.Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.
8.
CrowsonR. L., and MorrisV. C.1990. The Superintendency and School Leadership.Champaign-Urbana, IL: The National Center for School Leadership.
9.
DeYoungA. J., and LawrenceB. K.1995. “On Hoosiers, Yankees, and Mountaineers,”Phi Delta Kappan, 77: 104–112.
10.
EdmondsR.1979. “Effective Schools for the Urban Poor,”Educational Leadership, 37(1): 15–24.
11.
EricksonF.1986. “Qualitative Methods in Research on Teaching,” in WittrockM. C. (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching, New York: Macmillan, pp. 119–161.
12.
FinnC.1990. “The Biggest Reform of All,”Phi Delta Kappan, 71: 584–592.
13.
FullanM. G.1993. “Coordinating School and District Development in Restructuring,” in MurphyJ., and HallingerP. (eds.), Restructuring Schooling: Learning from Ongoing Efforts, Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press, pp. 143–164.
14.
FurtwenglerC. B.1997. The Education Management Organizations (EMO's) Are Coming: Does Anyone Know? Does Anyone Care? Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the University Council for Educational Administration, Orlando, October.
15.
GirouxH. A.1992. “Educational Leadership and the Crisis of Democratic Government,”Educational Researcher, 21(5): 4–11.
16.
GrahamP. A.1984. “Schools: Cacophony about Practice, Silence about Purpose,”Daedalus, 113: 29–57.
17.
HaasT.1992. “Leaving Home: Circumstances Afflicting Rural America during the Last Decade and Their Impact on Public Education,”Peabody Journal of Education, 67(4): 7–28.
18.
HamptonM.1996. Are We Still Receiving a Colored Education? Education of Black Students. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 398 335.
19.
HerzogM. J. R., and PittmanR. B.1995. “Home, Family, and Community,”Phi Delta Kappan, 77: 113–118.
20.
HowleyC. B., and HowleyA.1995. “The Power of Babble,”Phi Delta Kappan, 77: 126–131.
21.
JonesJ. E., and BearleyW. L.1989. Energizers for Training & Conferences.King of Prussia, PA: Organization Design and Development, Inc.
22.
KeedyJ. L.1991. “Traditional Norms of Schooling and the Issues of Organization Change,”Planning & Changing, 21: 140–145.
23.
KeedyJ. L.1992. “Creative Insubordination: Autonomy for School Improvement by Successful High School Principals,”High School Journal, 76: 17–23.
24.
KeedyJ. L.1995. “Exploring Political Coalitions in School Restructuring: Results from the Field,”Canadian Administrator, 35: 1–8.
25.
KeedyJ. L., and MacPhail-WilcoxB.1995. “Looking for the New Breed of Principal: Some Suggestions for Superintendents,”School Administrator, 52(2): 48–49.
26.
LouisK. S., and MilesM. B.1990. Improving the Urban High School.Teachers College Press: New York.
27.
MeadG. H.1934. Mind, Self, and Society.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
MeierD.1995. “How Our Schools Could Be,”Phi Delta Kappan, 76: 369–373.
29.
MerriamS. B.1988. Case Study Research in Education.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30.
MullinA. G.1997. “An Interpretive Case Study of a Superintendent's Transformational Behaviors and the Effects of Those Behaviors on Selected Principals and Teachers,” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
31.
OgawaR. T., and BossertS. T.1995. “Leadership as an Organizational Quality,”Educational Administration Quarterly, 31: 203–223.
32.
OgbuJ. U.1978. Minority Education and Caste: The American System in Cross-Cultural Perspective.New York: Academic Press.
33.
PajakE.1989. The Central Office Supervisor of Curriculum and Instruction.Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
34.
PerryE. A.1994. The Role of the School Administrator: Leading toward Cooperation, Paper presented at the International Conference of the International Association for the Study of Cooperation in Education, Portland, OR, July.
35.
RodriquezE., and NettlesM. T.1993. Achieving the National Education Goals: The Status of Minorities in Today's Global Economy, Denver, CO: State Higher Education Executive Officers Association.
36.
RosenholtzS.1989. Teacher's Workplace: A Social-Organizational Analysis.New York: Longman.
37.
SarasonS.1990. The Predictable Failure of School Reform.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38.
SeeleyD. S.1981. Education through Partnership.Cambridge: Ballinger.
SherJ. P.1992. “The Battle for the Soul of Rural School Reform,”Phi Delta Kappan, 72: 143–148.
41.
ShortP. M., and RinehartJ. S.1996. The Relationship of Teacher Empowerment and Principal Leadership Orientation, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April.
42.
StedmanL.1997. “Deep Achievement Problems: The Case for Reform Still Stands,”Educational Researcher, 26(3): 27–29.
43.
SternJ. D.1994. The Condition of Education in Rural Schools, Washington, DC: Author.
44.
StrikeK. A.1993. “Professionalism, Democracy, and Discursive Communities: Normative Reflections on Restructuring,”American Educational Research Journal, 30: 255–275.
45.
TimarT. B.1989. “The Politics of Restructuring,”Phi Delta Kappan, 71: 265–275.
