Volume 11, Number 3 The Coalition of Essential Schools January 1995651'P .24,;.3,532'i{«fit<%* {i'. {c j, *St,* p ..2--:tr.j' 1,;It{»,li«f-46*Q4Ii;.t: ):It ..f ./ -if-i: 2. ,: 4]5]·144'·° ,J·-

4* S 24 / .3 ..:4.'w:.: 7,:'' ' .. '."Bir

Research of allsorts-historicaf

sociological, and incognitive science-informs the ideasand guides thepractices ofEssential schools,

and can now beginto examine their

efrectiveness inenhancing studentunderstanding.

BY KATHLEEN CUSHMAN

What Research SuggestsAbout Essential School Ideas

MY PROBLEM WITH RESEARCH

into education, aside from how

hard it is to read, is that jt so often

seems to tell you what you alreadyknew anyhow. Why spend valuabletime and money proving that kidslearn to read quicker when you givethem good books, or that teenagersgo to school more readily and workharder if their teachers know their

names and care what they think? I

could have told you that, 1 grumble,and I go back to my novel.

Still, this particular era in thehistory of education does demandsome measure of reflection. What

patterns in the past, what scientificunderpinnings, did lead to the NineCommon Principles of the Coalitionof Essential Schools, which struck a

deep chord throughout the world ofschools? In the laboratory of schoolchange, have those deeply heldbeliefs proved true? Against theacid test-whether understandingincreases in students themselves-

would Coalition ideas and practicesbear fruit? I took myself to thestacks to find the facts.

But facts, as Coleridge said, "arenot truths; they are not conclusions;they are not even premises. Thetruth depends on, and is onlyarrived at, by a legitimate deduction

from all the facts which are trulymaterial." Researchers may set out,for instance, to explore how newways of teaching might help kidslearn more effectively. But all toosoon they must collide with the

organizational context in which

those innovations take place-andthe structures that impede orfacilitate change then frame anotherquestion for research.

My task, then, was to look

broadly at the research base onwhich Essential School reform rests,

and through several different lenses,particularly historical, sociological,and psychological among them.From the beginnings of the Coalitionto its ten-year mark, when it hasbecome the focus of research itself,

perhaps these facts could help toframe some "legitimate deduction."

The Lessons of History

Ted Sizer, a historian himself bytraining, often says that the ideas ofthe Coalition of Essential Schools

arose out of historical research.

Looking at the forces that shapedour present educational systemhelps us understand our currentsituation and gives us groundsfrom which to challenge it. (Anilluminating analysis, for example,of how American public schoolsevolved to their typical structure-from the early village schools to thebureaucratic and more centralized

systems of the nineteenth and twen-tieth centuries-appears in DavidTyack's The One Best System. A

History of American Urban Education.)Sizer's own vision of changing

schools emerged from the Study ofHigh Schools that he undertook inthe 19805 with several colleagues

from Harvard University and else-where. David K. Cohen's chapter onthe history of twentieth-centuryAmerican high schools in 7712S}u,pping Mall High School andRobert 1- 1 fampel's essays on thehistory of high schools since the19*)s both resulted from that study(as did Size/s own book, i jorace'sCompromise. The Ditemmo of theAmerican /Jigh School). Together theyform an enlightening picture of thehistory of American public educa-ticm in this century, how tt startedand how it changed. The terms ofthe current debate over high schcx,1education were set, these histories

make clear, as early as the 18900; andits main c(,ncern-academic quillity,curricular flexibility, and studentmotivaticm and engagement-havenot changed much since then.

But in different peric,ds educa-tors have understood those concerns

in different ways, and shaped theirplans for clic,ols accordingly. Thiscentury's first four decades, forinstance, saw a wave of intenseactivityas thecountry builtasecondary school system that startedwith about half a million studentsand ended with six and a half million

by 1940. The move was driven notonly by an increasing populationand changing labor practices but bya general belief that through educa-tion could come social and economic

improvement. Society began toregard teenagers as minors to beprotected from exploitation in thelabor force, and this created apowerful new reason (aside fromacademic ambition) for them to goto school. For the first time, highschools found themselves educatinglarge numbers of students who werenot there to prepare for elite collegesor universities.

Schools responded to thissituation by offering separatecourses of study for the college-bound, forbusine,e; students, and for

those seeking vcr.,tional training. By1930, a distinct minority of studentswas enrcilled inacademic tracks; and

in fact (as Rcibert and 1 lele n Lynd's

HORACE

19205 and '3(}s study of ".Middle-town" and August Hollingshead's19305 study of "Elmtown" found)few students either worked hard or

even reported learning as their aimin attending high school. By andlarge, David Cohen observes, kidschanneled their energy into socializ-ing, extracurricular activities, sports,and after-school jobs.

in response, he says, schoolsfound themselves easing up on aca-demic standards and differentiatingtheir program to suit their clients'interests and perceived abilities.Then as now-despite the dismay ofuniversities over how poorly pre-pared, disengaged, and bored withacademics students were-neitherstudents nor their communities

expressed much dissatisfaction withtheir own school experiences.

Not everyone agreed with theway schools saw their task, though.John Dewey, among others, arguedthat high school work could be bothintellectually serious and deeplyengaging for everyone. In the nextseveral decades, educators of allstripes began to criticize and reshapethe secondary school system. Havingmade classes more accessible to

students deemed incapable of seri-ous academic work, they began inthe Cold War era to stiffen academic

requirements in the top track.But even among those who

worried about maintaining bothequality of access to learning andhigh quality, Cohen notes, few gavemuch attention to how teachers

practiced their craft. Until a revolu-tion in cognitive science began tofocus attention on how people learn,even those schools that tried to

engage kids through curricularofferings used methods of instruc-tion that left them passive and bored.

in 1969 the country began regu-larly to measure the performance ofits students through the NationalAssessment of Educational Progress(NAEID. And just as the country'sneeds for workers trained in higher-order thinking skills reached a newhigh in the 19805, NAEP data

2

revealed, fewer students were leav-ing school proficient in those skills.

In this historical context, thenext wave of school reform began,sparked by the 1983 publication ofthe government's report A Nation atRisk. Educational reformers broughtto the table many ways to reshapethe country's schools-from intro-ducing school-based management ormarket competition to givingstudents more tests and holdingschools more accountable for their

performance. But for the first time,change addressed more than just theforms and organization of schooling.Now researchers also had new waysto evaluate instructional alternatives,

through cognitive scientists' theoret-ical advances in the area of teachingand learning.

The Social PerspectiveThe Coalition of Essential Schools

began in 1984 as an effort to linkteachers and schools across the

country in a shared commitment tonew ways of thinking about what

HORACEHORACE is publishedfive times yearly at BrownUniversity by the Coalitionof Essential Schools, Box1969, Brown University,Providence, RI 02912.

Beginning with Volume 10,individual subscriptionsare $20 a year (payable toBrown University); backcopies are $1.50 each.Publication of HORACE

is supported in part by agrant from the Geraldine RDodge Foundation.

Editor:

Kathleen Cushman

Managing Editor.Susan Fisher

January 1995

gc,es (,n in the classrcum. Frc,m itsmodest start with twelve member

schools, it has grown to includeclose to 800 at various stages ofinvolvement. it has allied itself with

the Educatiori Commission of the

States, in the Re:Learning initiativethat concentrates on state and local

policy. And its National Re:LearningFaculty has created a professionaldevelopment network that trajnsteachers to work for change withintheir own and nearby schools.

The very existence of such anetwork, argues Stanford Universityresearcher Milbrey McLaughlin,creates a crucial context that makes

schcxit change more likely. Studiesshe condu cted from 1987 to 1992 atthe Center for Research on the

Context of Secondary SchoolTeaching show that reforms take

hold only when teachers operatewithin a strong and supportive prc)-fessional community. Whether thatcommunity comes from a depart-ment, a school, a professional orga-nization (like the National WritingProject), ora network such as CESmatters little as long as it works to"generate knowledge, craft new

norms of practice, and sustainparticipants in their efforts to reflect,examine, experiment, and change,-

Where states and districts pro-mote a common set of principles asthe backbone of systemic reformefforts, teachers reshape their atti-tudes and practices more successful-ly, McLaughlin's data show. (StrongEssential Schc,01 networks in Califor-

nia, Kentucky, and New York, forexample, have created a culture ofinnovation by embedding Coalitionprinciples in curriculum frameworksand assessment instruments.) But

that condition is not enough,Mclaughlin warns; teachers mustalso "participate in a professionalccimmunity tiwt discusses newte.iching materials and strategies,ind th,it supports the risk-taking,and struggle entailed in transform-ina pmctice."

Even that support may provefrail within the culture c)f individual

schools, ethnograpliic research

HORACE

Some Key Findings that SupportEssential School Ideas

• How personal the secondary school environment is matters more than anyother single factor in encouraging students' engagement and their willingnessto work hard on academic goals. When teachers connect with and understandtheir students' families, cultures, and life outside school, students achieve athigher levels. (Mclaughlin 1993)

• At all achievement levels students prefer an active classroom role, and thisis particularly important to nontraditional students, who generally fail tothrive in teacher-dominated classrooms. (McLaughlin 1993)

• Disadvantaged students seem to benefit from schools where advancedacademic course work sets high expectations for all. (Lee and Smith 1994;Bryk, [*,e, and Holland 1993)

• By itself, implementing more challenging, higher-quality academic contentwill accomplish little if students do not feel connected to school and take apositive view of themselves as learners. (Lee and Smith 1994)

• Smaller schools are more productive work places for both adults andstudents, and student achievement is more equitably distributed. (Lee, Bryk,and Smith 1990)

• Any number of restructuring moves that depart significantly from conver-tional practices to make schools less bureaucratic and more "communal"contribute to student achievement gains across the spectrum of socioeconomicand other differences. (Lee and Smith 1994)

• The public believes that students should not graduate or be passed fromgrade to grade without evidence of achievement, not merely effort. (PublicAgenda 1994)

• Good schools do not merely compile innovative elements when theyrestructure; they have an "effective organizational syndrome" that is often"communally organized," reflecting a vision of how components worktogether. (Chubb and Moe 1990; Bryk and Driscoll 1988; Bryk et al. 1993)

• Networks of all kinds-among schcols, among teachers exploring newpractices, among students-contribute to deeper student learning.(McLaughlin 1993)

• A sense of mission or ethos that defines the school contributes to higherstu-dent achievement, particularly with disadvantaged students. (Bryk et al. 1993)

• Students learn best when learning is embedded in authentic contexts.(Collins et al. 1991)

• A studenfs intelligence is not fixed and unitary but a uniquely personalcomplex that thrives best when instruction is personal and developmentallyappropriate. (Gardner et al., 1991)

indicates. Unless a school builds a

sense of shared purpose and values,continuing to reflect on and developit and drawing in new participantsover time, Essential School ideas

will not exert permanent or far-reaching influence, as DonnaMuncey and Patrick McQuillanconclude in their five-year study ofeight Coalition member schools.

3

Yet if a school does succeed in

instilling such a sense of mission, thecommon set of principles Essential

schools adopt will in itself contrib-ute to the likelihood that students

will achieve at higher levels, otherresearch indicates. In their studies of

Catholic schools and of small schools

in the Chicago area and elsewhere,Anthony Bryk and his colleagues

January 1995

found that any strong shared ethosin a school makes students take their

work more seriously and do betteratjt.

Enter the Number-Crunchers

Impressive new evidence about theimportance of such supportivecontexts came recently from a hugestatisticaj survey of student achieve-ment in restructuring high schools,conducted by University of Michj-gan professor Valerie Lee and JuliaSmith of the University of Rochester.

For 1 1,704 students from 820 secon-

dary schools participating in theNational Education LongitudinalStudy, Lee and Smith followedacademic progress from the eighthgrade to the tenth, as represented byconventional standardized test

scores and other survey data. Whenthey analy=1 student performance,they also screened out the effects ofsocioeconomic and other differences.

Using carefully defined criterja,Lee and Smith categorized theschools involved into those whose

Three Kinds of Change that Schools Call Reform:Traditional, Moderate, and Restructuring Practices

Valerie Lee and Julia Smith's 1994 study showed impressive gains inearly secondary school students' achievement when their schools departedsignificantly from conventional practice. Using the following criteria drawnfrom the University of Wisconsin's Center on Organization and Restructuringof Schools (and reprinted with WCER's permission), they divided reform-mindd schools into three categories based on what kinds of reforms they hadinstituted. (Note: the practices appear in descending order of the probabilitythat an average high school engages in them. About 12 percent of the 820 highschciols studied reported engaging in none of these practices.)

Similarities to certain Essential SchooJ ideas-notably those aimed at per-sonalizing the teacher-student connection, at interdisciplinary teaching, atmereasing academic qual jty, and at the flexible use of lim-are apparent inthe category c,f "restructuring practices."

Traditional Practices

Departmentalization with chairsCommon classes for same curricular

track

Staff development focusing onadolescents

MA or FrO

Parent-teacher conferences each

semester

Focus on cdtical thinking in curriculumCommon classes for different curricular

tracks

Increased graduation requirementsRecognition program for good teachingParents sent information on how to

help kids study

Moderate Practices

Patent workshops on adolescent

problemsStudent satisfaction with courses

importantStvng emphads on parental

involvement

Strong emphasis on increasing

HORACE

academic requirementsStudent evaluation of course content

importantOutstanding teachers are recognizedEmphasis on staff stabilityEmphasis on staff development

activities

Restructuring Practices

Students keep same homeroomthroughout high school

Emphasis on staff solving schoolproblems

Parents volunteer in the schools

Interdisciplinary teaching teamsIndependent study, Eng./soc. studiesMixed ability classesin math/scienceCooperative learning focusStudent evaluation of teachers

importantIndependent study in math/scienceSchool-within-a-school

Teacher teams have common

planning timeFlexible time for classes

4

reform practices they called"traditional," "moderate," and

"restructuring." The practices makeup a Chinese menu of options, butthose that departed most significant-ly from conventional schoolingtended to aim for a more personal,"communal" organizational style asopposed to a more traditional,bureaucratic one. In fact, the prac-tices regarded as "restructuring"echo many Essential School con-cerns, from the belief that teachersshould know their students well to

an emphasis on universal goals forstudents of varying achievementlevels. (See sidebar, this page.)

The studfs findings broughtgood news for Essential school

advocates. "Not onJy were studentachievement outcomes in the first

two years of high school significant-ly higher in the restructuring schoolsthan in the traditional schools," Lee

and Smith report, "but those gainsaiso were distributed more equi-tably. That is, the achievement gapbetween the students of lower

socioeconomic status, or SES, and

students of higher SES was narrow-er in restructured schools." Across

all socioeconomic groups and in thefields of mathematics, reading, his-tory, and science, "students inrestructured schools learned more,

as indicated by test results, and weremore engaged than their counter-parts in either traditional or non-reforming schools."

Trying too many reforms all atonce, these data indicate, may back-fire; gains were smaller and theirdjstribution less equitable whenschools reported trying more thanthree restructuring practices at once.

The Coalition's belief that

schools should be smaller and more

personal also found support in thisresearch. Above and beyond thegains resulting from any reformpractices, smaller schools consis-tently posted higher and moreequitably distributed gains in allfour cognitive areas.

Researchers Lee and Smith do

not conclude that "restructuring

January 1995

.

Student Achievement in Restructured Schools

7

Engagement ·3

Math Gain .13

Reading Gain 43

History Gain .12

Science Gain -3.20

24

30

-15 -10 ·5 0 51015202530

29

This figure represents the percent gain in student engagement and achieve-ment for schools with different types of practices (compared toschools withtraditional reform practices) in Lee and Smith's 1994 longitudinal study,"High School Restructuring and Student Achievement." It compares perfor-mance gains of students from eighth grade to tenth grade in traditionallyrestructured schools with student gains in the two other types of schools,using the traditionally restructured schools' gains as a baseline score of 0.Students at schools with restructuring practices showed greater gains; schoolswith no restructuring practices showed less imprcivement. (Reprinted by per-mission of the Wisconsin Center for Education Research, Madison,Wisconsin)

practices" in themselves directly

"cause" these gains in student per-formance. More likely, both theyand other commentators note,

students have thrived because their

schools make personal attention andrespect a priority, and establish a

climate where everyone cares aboutshared learning goals,

But though test scores may be

rising, overall student achievementstill falls far short of excellence,

NAEP scores show. And scrutinizingthe list of even the most ambitious

restructuring practices theseresearchers found, one still cannot

conclude that such changes relatedirectly to derpening the curriculumor raising the quality of intellectual

work. In fact, Bitch large-scale quan-titative research cannot by its nature

get close enough to actual teachingand learning to shed real light onwhat might cause improvement instudent achievement.

HORACE

At the same time, the nation has

a growing political and ec6nomicawareness that students must per-form at ever higher levels to meet theglobal economy's need for "knowl-edge workers." An unlikely allianceof interests is pressing for everyone tolearn the "higher order thinking

skills" society once reserved for itselite. The skills and abilities requiredby employers today are at leastthose required for college entranceten years ago, researcher LaurenResnick at the University ofPittsburgh has noted; in the future,they will rise even higher.

Given these expectations forstudent work. Essential School ideas

stand in a particular relation toschool restructuring iii general:Unlike schools that start with struc-

tural changes, Essential schools start

witli deepening the curriculum.Sizer's ideas arose from his commit-

Inent to the "tri,7 ngle of leartiitig"

5

linking teacher, student, and subjectmatter, and from his passionate con-viction, derived from John Dew«sphilosophy, that all children couldlearn to use their minds well.

Changing the way teachers workwith kids in their daily practice, hebelieves, must constitute the heart of

any school restructuring-a focushistory reveals as all too easy to

neglect.

Teaching Thinking

But the Essential School principlecalling for schools to judge student

mastery by demonstrated exhibition,for example, does not in itselfdemand any of the restructuring

practices common in schools. Itdepends, rather, on a shift in teach-ers' attitudes. about what constitutes

authentic student understanding,how to teach for it, and how to

recognize it when we see it.In the past several decades, the

burden of researching such ques-tions has gone to psychologists andphilosophers in the field of cognitivescience. Many began exploring howhuman beings think, remember, andlearn as they probed for ways tocreate artificial intelligence in newlypowerful computers. Others-such

as Lauren Resnick and University ofCalifornia professor Ann Brown-applied the new "science of the

mind" to what goes on betweenteacher and student in the classroom.

What these researchers found

flew directly in the face of how thisnation's schools had operated since

their beginnings. If students are tobecome thinkers, cognitive scientistsshowed, they must take an active

part in constructing their ownknowledge. Teachers cannot merelydeliver instruction; they must

instead provoke understanding intheir students, mediate it, coach the

skills that prompt it to emerge. Andif learning is to take hold-to lastbeyond the Friday test-they willneed a whole new variety of teach-ing strategies that infuse thinkingskills throughout the curriculum.

At the heart of those strategies,

January 1995

What Does the Public Want? Essential Schooling Perhapsby Peter Huidekoper, the Gates Foundation

What do parents want o# their chikdren's schools? Whatdoes the public believe about our schools and how wellthey are doing? fs there a "disconnect," as recent reportsimply, between the answers to those questions and thereform efforts of the Coalition of Essential Schools? Or does

that impression arise largely from poor communication?First Things First: What Americans Expect from the Public

Schools, a national report released in fall 1994 by the PublicAgenda Foundation, offers a rich account of what the pub·lic believes is taking pface-andshouid be taking place-inour schools, "School'Experts' Found Out of Sync withPublic," reads the headline over &/utatimn Week's summaryof the study.

The Gates Foundation jn Colorado (the principalprivate supporter of Re: Learning in the state) also recentlyunde,took a survey, of Coloradans' attitudes toward publiceducation. It was part of our effort known as Agenda 21,which attempts to dose the gap between the public, policymakers, and educators around a number of importanteducational issues.

A close look at the results from both studies reveals

many shared concerns between the principles of theCoalition of Essential Schoofs and what the public wants ofAmerica's schools. Here are just a few examples.

For a large majority of Americans, too many puWicschools are not meeting their most elemental goal: ensuringthat the nation's children master some bask, but essential

skills-the ability to read and write English and to dosimple arithmetic by hand, along with a "commonknowledge" understanding of science, history, andgeography. (First Things First, p. 3)

When Theodore Sizer and his colleagues studiedAmerican high schools in the early 19805, they found"shopping mall high schools" with a loss of focus, and

students not learning at a high level. The first two princi-ples of the Coalition of Essential Schools seem consistentwith what most parents want: 1. The school shoitid focus onhelping young paople develop the habit of usilig their minds well(And maintain itsj ce,limi inkilectual purpose; 2.77,e school'seendemic goal should be simple: thnt mch student moster n limil-ed number of essentia/ skills and areas of knmoledge.

The Agenda 21 poll found that of the majority (65percent) of Coloradans who felt public education was onthe wrong track, the first reason people gave for feeling thisway was that "the basics are not taught." No doubt somedisagree about what are "basics" and what are "essentialskills," but don't the first two Coalition principles generallyrespond to what the public expects from public schools?

"It is not uncommon for some in the educational

reform movement to refer to 'the basics' with disdain,"

Fimt 77,ings First states, "and numerous observers haveinterpreted the public's continuing focus on basics asevidence of lack of support for mon rigorous andchallenging course work. From the publies point of view,however, making sure public school children completetheir education with a firm command of the basics is not

a trivial or inconsequential goal. It is the essential

HORACE 6

foundation on which children build their future. . . .r

To many Americans, "education experts" seem togivesurprisingly short shrift to basics--skipping over them todiscuss issues such as the importance of "critical thinkingskills," the need to learn teamwork, and other higher-orderskills that are at the top of reformers' agenda. But whenpeople talk about "the basics," they are not necessarily suggesting that children can't do more, or that higher levels ofachievement are not desirable. What most people seem tomean is "First things first." Indeed, the vast majority ofAmericans (96 percent) support having "tougher and morechallenging courses" in thebasks. (p. 14)

As further support of this point, note the response ofColoradans to the Agenda 21 poll item that read, "Ifschools would just go back to teaching the basics--likereading, writing, and arithmetic-it would solve a lot oftoday's problems in public education." A majority (57 per-cent) disagreed with that statement. The analysts' conclu-sion: "The public wants young people to know the basics,but not only the basics. Or put more formally, knowing thebasics is seen as a necessary condition of being educated,but nota sufficient one."

In short, the public very much wants clarity aboutexpectations, about what are the "essential skills and areasoi knowledge." According to First Things First. "Uke lead-ers, people believe that academic standards should beraised, that schools and teachers should be clear and specif-ic about what they expect children to learn." (p. 15)

There is great agreement, as well, on the issue of thesize of the school and of classes. According to the studydone by First Things First, there is substantial concern aboutlarge classes. About half of Americans, and 63 percent ofAfrican-Americans, say classes are too crowded in theirlocal schools. Respondents in focus groups often proposesmaller classes as an effective way to make the schools

more orderly and thus improve learning. This study, andother Public Agenda education projects, suggest that peo-pie place a very high premium on the teachefs role jn asmall-scale, structured environment. People believe studentssucceed best when a teacher knows them individually,knows how to encourage and challenge them, checks care-fully on both their academic work and their behavior, andresponds quickly and decisively if they fall behind. (p. 22)

This corresponds nicely with many of the conclusionsTed Sizer and his colleagues draw in Homce's Compromiseand ne Shopping Mall High School. The fourth CommonPrinciple speaks to the issue of class size and teachers know-ing their students well. Schools that work hard to get thosenumbers down and personalize the learning experience forall students will be responding to a parent's longing forsafeschools wherea few adults know their students well.

Such areas of common ground exist. If we listen hardand speak clearly, we might go a long way toward over-coming the gaps between the public and education reform.Better communication might reveal that parents and teach-ers, the public and the school reformers, are not really so"out of sync" after all.

January 1995

many argue, is the need to rethink

the role of assessment in teachingand learning. Essential schooladvocates call for exhibitions of

mastery because they believe theyprovidea key t<,01-far better thanconventional testing instruments

offer-for revealing where studentsare encountering stumbling blocksin their emerging understanding.Once teachers and students have

this information, the theory goes,they can address the shortfalls atonce, folding their insights back intotheir daily actions and curriculum.

This approach could imply awhole new array of standardmeasures of student performance.Or. as the Coalition of 1Essential

Schixils prefers, it might insteadencciurage teachers to develop the·critical habits that let thorn assess

student understanding on the spot,against agreed-on local priorities.

Regardless, the new approach toassessment ccmtradicts much c,f

American education's conventional

wisdom-that testing exists to sortcmt, select, and reward an elite whocari think.

Instead, cognitive research hasshown, any student will learn if

teachers pay attention to his or herunique inte]Iectual profile, adaptingC|aSSRK)m strategies to best suit thesituation. Students whose intelli-

gence mani fests itself primarily informs other than language or mathe-

matical logic-through music or art,for example, or through the use ofthe body-have been abandoned bytraditional schooling techniques,contend Howard Gardner and

joseph Walters at Harvard Univer-sity's Project Zero. Their researchinto the leartiing process has estab-lished the usefulness of portfoliosand projects iii evaluating students;'thinking skills across that spectrum.

At the same time, Gardner and

his I larvard colleagues David Per-kin. and Vito Ibrronehave directed

rese,irch intri cognitive skills, aimedat developing and testing a "peda-gogy of understanding" in the mid-dle and high school years. TheTeaching for Understanding project,

HORACE

with its emphasis on1 jn-depth learn-ing and performance assessment,documents in a research settingmany Essential school practices.

The idea emerged from researchshowing how "fragile" was theknowledge even the best studentstook away from the traditional cur-riculum. Students dung to miscon-ceptions and stereotypes in key aca-dem jc areas even after they hadd<,ne well on cc,ursework and tests,

beveral studies confirmed. Real

understand ing must involve beingable tc, do somethi,ig with contentknowledge, this research shows-

explain it, find evidence for it, applyit, generalize from it, and represent it

in new ways. The "generative top-ics" that Perkins and his colleaguesdescribe as lending themselves tosuch teaching bear a striking similar-

ity to the Coalition's "essential ques-Sons." if they can be shown to raisestudents' ability to perform at higherlevels of thinking, we will have aresearch platform from whichfurther ga ins can take off.

Researching the CoalitionA number of other researchers have

gone into the classroom to observefirst hand what works and what

doem't in Essential School reform.

Much of this work focuses not onlyon shifting priorities in curriculum,pedagogy, and assessment but alsoon the accompanying changes with-in the schools as social organizations.

Donna Muncey and PatrickMcQuillan's ethnographic studies inCha#enging Rejorm (forthcomingfrom Yale University Press) offer arich look at the process and pitfallsof early Essential school changeefforts. The University of Illinois'sNona Prestine is tracing the progressover five years of schools in thatstate's Re:Learning Alliance. Underthe aegis of the Center for Technol-ogy in Education, Alan Collinsfollowed the "cognitive apprentice-ship" of students at Central ParkEast Secondary School in New York.Linda Darling-Hammond and hercolleagues at Columbia's National

7

Center for Restructuring Education,Schools, and Teaching (NCREST)have studied Coalition member

schools in New York and elsewhere.

Sam Stringfield's study oftenpromising educational reformsfound that no matter the strength oftheir ideas, all shared the strugglesof changing entrenched institutions.

CES researchers too are chartingthe course of their movement,

Patricia Wasley's book Stirring theChalkdust follows five teachers in

Coalition member schools throughthe throes of changing their class-room practice. Joe McDonald'sforthcoming book Redesigning Schoolstudies ten member schools with an

eye to identifying predictableproblems and patterns.

Classroom teachers can also

contribute to educational research

by posing questions about theirpractice and sharing the results theycollect with universitypartners.Such "action research" also con-

tributes to professional developmentas teachers grow more reflective,talk more with colleagues aboutteaching and learning, and begin tochange their classroom practicebased on observable results.

So what does research tell us

about Essential Schooling that wedidn't know before? Does the

accrued evidence actually affectwhat teachers and students do when

they meet up at school each day?"The relationship between

research and practice is not a simple,linear one," says the Coalition's JoeMcI)onald. "We should never fall

into the trap of thinking thatresearch tells us what to do; it can

only i,rfonn school practice, not dic-tate it." The Essential School mission

makes sense, he argues, from severalpoints of view-political, education-a], moral, and cognitive. Beyondthat, perhaps better merely to agreewith James Thurber that it is betterto know some of tlie questions thanall of the answers. In that respect,certainly, Essential Schools seem tobe headed along the right path. 0

January 1995

Bruer, john T., Sdects for Thought. AScience i Learning in the Classroom.Cambridge, MA: M]T Press,1993.

Bryk, Anthony S. and Driscoll, M. E, TwHigh School as Comminity: ConteriwlInfluences, and Consequences for Studentsand Teachers. Madison: University ofWisconsin-Madison, National Center onEffective Secondary Schools, 1988.

Bryk, A. S. etal., A View from theElementa,y Schools: The State of Reform inChimgo. Chicago: U of Chicago, Censor-tium on ChicagoSchool Research, 1993.

Bryk, A. S., Lee, V. E., and Holland, P.B., Catiwlic Schools and the Common God.

Cambridge: Harvard U. Press, 1993.

Chubb, J. E. and Mee, T. M.,Politics,Mtirkets, am/ Anwrirn's Schools. Washing-ton, DC: Brookings Institution, 1990.

Collins, A., Hawkins, J·, and Carver, S.,

"A Cognitive Apprenticeship forDisadvantaged Students," in TeachingAdvanced Skills to At-Risk Students,Barbara Means et al., eds. Sari Francisco:

Jossey-Bass, 1991.

Gardner, H; "Assessment in Context:

The Alternative to Standardized

Testing," in Gifford, B.R. and CYConnor,M. C., eds., Changing Assessments.Boston: Kluwer, 1991.

Gardner, H., Perkins, D.,and Perrone,

V., "Enhancing DisciplinaryUnderstanding in Teachers and

A Selected Research Bibliography

HORACECoalition of Essential Schools

Box 1969, Brown UniversityProvidence, RI 02912

Studens." Repert of Projet Zero,Harvard University, 1991.

Jones, Beau Fly and Lorna Idol, eds.Dimensions of Tltinking and Cognitivebistruction. Hilisdale, NJ: North CentmlRegional Educational Laboratory, 1990.

Lee, V. E., Bgk, A. S., and Smith, J. B.,

"The Organization of EffectiveSecondary Schools," Review of Researchin Education (1993, Vol. 19,171-268).

Lee, V. E, Bryk, A. S., and Smith. J. B."High School Organization and ItsEffects on Teachers and Students: An

Interpretive Summary of the Research,"in W. H. Cluneand J. F. Witte (eds.),Choic c id Control in Amerimn Education,

Vol. 1. Philadelphia: Falmer, 1990.

Lee, Valerie E. and Julia B. Smith, "HighSchool Restructuring and StudentAchievement." Madison: University ofWisconsin, Wisconsin Center forEducation Research, 1994.

Lieberman, A. and M. W. Mci.aughlin,"Networks for Educational Change.Powerful and Problematic." Phi Delta

Kapptin (73)9. 673-77, May 1992.

Mci..aughlin, Milbrey W. and Talbert,loanE. Contexts That Matter for Teacitingami imming. Palo Alto, CA: Center forResearch on the Context of SecondarySchool Teaching, 1993.

Mclaughlin, M. W., Talbert, J. E., andBascia, N., eds, 71:e Contexts of Teaching

in Sectmdrtry 5(heels. New YorkTeachers College Press, 1990.

Muncey, D. and McQuillan, P.,"Change Takes Time." journal ofCurriculum Studies 1994,26 (3).

Muncey, D. and Mc©i|HAn, P.,"Preliminary Findings from a FiveYear Study of the Coalition ofEssential Schools:' Phi Delta Kappon,February 1993.Perkins, David, Smart Sdtoots. Front

Training Memories to Educating Minds.New York: Free Press, 1992.

Arthur Powell, Eleanor Farrar, and

David K. Cohen, 7;te Shopping Mall HighSchool (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1985).

Public Agenda Foundation. Fint ThingsFirst: Witat Americmns Expect from theirPublic Sdiools. New York: Public

Agenda, 1994.Resnick, L. and Resnick, D., "Assessingthe Thinking Curriculum: New'roolsfor Educational Reform," in Gifford,B.R. and CYConnor, M. C., eds., ChangingAssessments. Boston: Kluwer, 1991.

Sizer, T. R., Homce's Compromise: 77eDilemma of the American High School.Bostonr Houghton Mifflin, 1984.

David B. Tyack, The One Best System: AHistory ofAmericxm Urban Education.

Cambridge: Harvard U Press, 1974.

Non-Profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAID

Providence, RIPermit No. 202

-