AUTHOR TITLE ARE D° al II PUB DATE NOTE u- lIti PUB TYPE DOCUMENT RESUME EA 026 206 Levin, Henry M.; Chasin, Gene Thomas Edison Accelerated Elementary School. SrpOtanford Univ., Calif. Center for Educational MIIesearch at Stanford. Mar 94 30p.; Article prepared for the Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: Creating New Educational Communities. Schools, and Classrooms Where All Children Can Be Smart (94th, Chicago. University of Chicago Press, forthcoming). Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MFOI/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Elementary Education; *High Risk Students; Minority Groups; *Participative Decision Making; Program Development; Program Effectiveness; *School Restructuring IDENTIFIERS *Accelerated Schools; *Sacramento City Unified School District CA ABSTRACT This paper describes early outcomes of a Sacramento, California, elementary school that participated in the Accelerated Schools Project. The school, which serves many minority and poor students, began training Eor the project in 1992. Accelerated Schools were designed to advance the learning rate of students through a gifted and talented approach, rather than slowing it through remedial instruction. The project is based on the following principles: (1) bringing all children into the mainstream; (2) empowering the school site; and (3) building on strengths. After approximately one and one-half years, decision making in the school had shifted to the cadres (small advisory/planning groups), the steering committee, and the school as a whole. Regular meetings and an inquiry process were under way, and faculty collaboration increased. The school's unusually rapid transformation is attributed to its high level of readiness and strong leadership. Other project outcomes included increased enrollment, decreased student suspensions and absences, and improved standardized test scores. Extensive notes contain reference materials. (LMI) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ***********************************************************************
30
Embed
DOCUMENT RESUME al II - ERIC · In this respect, Thomas Edison Elementary School in Sacramento is a prototype of the California challenge. Edison is one of 51 elementary schools among
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
AUTHORTITLE
ARE D° al IIPUB DATENOTE
u-
lIti
PUB TYPE
DOCUMENT RESUME
EA 026 206
Levin, Henry M.; Chasin, GeneThomas Edison Accelerated Elementary School.
SrpOtanford Univ., Calif. Center for EducationalMIIesearch at Stanford.
Mar 9430p.; Article prepared for the Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education: CreatingNew Educational Communities. Schools, and ClassroomsWhere All Children Can Be Smart (94th, Chicago.University of Chicago Press, forthcoming).Reports Descriptive (141)
Groups; *Participative Decision Making; ProgramDevelopment; Program Effectiveness; *SchoolRestructuring
IDENTIFIERS *Accelerated Schools; *Sacramento City Unified SchoolDistrict CA
ABSTRACTThis paper describes early outcomes of a Sacramento,
California, elementary school that participated in the AcceleratedSchools Project. The school, which serves many minority and poorstudents, began training Eor the project in 1992. Accelerated Schoolswere designed to advance the learning rate of students through agifted and talented approach, rather than slowing it through remedialinstruction. The project is based on the following principles: (1)bringing all children into the mainstream; (2) empowering the schoolsite; and (3) building on strengths. After approximately one andone-half years, decision making in the school had shifted to thecadres (small advisory/planning groups), the steering committee, andthe school as a whole. Regular meetings and an inquiry process wereunder way, and faculty collaboration increased. The school'sunusually rapid transformation is attributed to its high level ofreadiness and strong leadership. Other project outcomes includedincreased enrollment, decreased student suspensions and absences, andimproved standardized test scores. Extensive notes contain referencematerials. (LMI)
OE PARMIENT Of .Dor MON .PERMISSICN TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
ka. _ - ,
THOMAS EDISON ACCELERATED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Henry M. Levin and Gene Chasin
March 1994
I. ACCELERATED SCHOOLS PROJECTA Strategy for Change
(1) Unity of Purpose(2) School-Site Empowerment(3) Buildina on Strengths
Combining the PrinciplesDecision - Makina in Accelerated SchoolsBuildina School Capacity
II. APPLYING THE MODEL AT EDISONAwareness and Buying -InInitiatina the ProcessTaking StockDevelopina a Livina VisionChoosing Priorities and GovernanceStaff Development and PracticeEarly Results
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER IERICI
Henry M. Levin is the David Jacks Professor of Higner Education andEconomics and Dirercor of the National Center for the AcceleratedSchools Project, CERAS 109, Stanford University, Stanford, CA94305. Telephone: 415 723 0840. Gene Chasin is the Principal ofthe Thomas Edison Accelerated Elementary School, 1500 Don Way,Sacramento, CA 95825. Telephone: 916 575 2342.This article was prepared for the 94th NSSE Yearbook: Creating NewEducational Communities. Schools. and Classrooms Where All ChildrenCan Be $mart, Jeannie Oakes and Karen Hunter Quartz, Editors(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, forthcoming).
W BEST COPY AVAILABLE
2
Henry M. Levib
ERE Do atihrogi,ii";1 11P sed
THOMAS EDISON ACCELERATED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
j jabijor challenge of our time is to meet the educational needs
of the large numbers of children in at-risk situations. School
practices are not neutral about who succeeds. Children from
families with both parents present, substantial parental education
and income, and a middle class version of U.S. culture and the
English language tend to have school experiences which value and
build on their backgrounds. In contrast, students from immigrant,
minority, and poverty families often face a serious discontinuity
between their out-of-school experiences and what schools require
for success. Schools rarely find constructive ways to embrace the
experiences of such children, relegating many of them to failure.
Nationally, students in at-risk situations have increased rapidly,
accounting for up to 40 percent of elementary and secondary
enrollments? In California', the numbers have risen even more
quickly with a majority of students perceived to be in at-risk
situations.
In this respect, Thomas Edison Elementary School in Sacramento
is a prototype of the California challenge. Edison is one of 51
elementary schools among the 89 schools in the San Juan Unified
School District. Over the past five years Edison and four other
elementary schools within the district, have started facing "urban"
challenges. In the fall of 1989, Edison had a total of 360
students of which 36 percent were receiving public assistance under
Aid for Dependent Children (AFDC) and Free or Reduced Cost Lunch,
Ikrete was approximately 30 percent, and only EnglishERE Do artv
was spoken. Behavior was a problem that year with a total of 103
--1THlays
of,
suspension, primarily for fighting. There were 7 robberies
in-i;hih audio-visual equipment was stolen.
Just three years later, in 1992-93, the school's enrollment
had grown by one-third to 494 students of which 80 percent were on
AFDC and Free or Reduced Cost lunch. Thirteen different languages
were spoken. But, contrary to what might have been expected from
changes in the student clientele, the mobility rate had dropped to
23 percent, student behavior had improved with only 34 total days
of suspension and there were n2 break-ins for the school year. And
test scores of the sixth graders on CTBS had risen in all three
areas tested.
Edison's early success in meeting its challenges are due to a
major transformation of the school that has been undertaken by
Edison staff, students, and parents. Edison is one of the
expanding number of over 500 schools in 33 states (in 1993-94) that
are following the Accelerated Schools process to bring all students
into the academic mainstream by the end of elementary school and
support that progress at the middle and secondary levels. Before
describing how that process was implemented at Edison, it is
important to provide background on the Accelerated Schools Project.
I ACCELERATED SCHOOLS PROJEci
The Accelerated Schools Project was initiated in the summer of
1986 as a thirty year project that was designed to respond to the
RED° jeacsp
o fit-
*v.isk students. Four years of previous research on at -
iAld their schools came to rather stark conclusions
about their challenges.2 Such students started school without many
L
of the ls that schools valued and got farther behind the
edu itional mainstream the longer that they were in school. Over
half of the at-risk population did not graduate from high school.
The research found that the inability of existing schools to
advance the education of at-risk students is hardly an accident.
Most schools that enroll such children embrace organizational,
curricular, and instructional strategies of remediation that lead
to reduced expectations and stigmatization of at-risk students,
uninspiring school experiences, and a devaluing of the rich talents
of students, teachers, and parents. In the absence of change,
students are subjected systematically to an experience that will
assure high failure rates.
In contrast, Accelerated Schools were designed to advance the
learning rate of students rather than slowing it by transforming
instruction from a remedial approach to a gifted and talented one.
Educators usually reserve acceleration programs for students who
are the top performers. In contrast, remedial instruction reduces
the pace and quality of learning to accommodate student weaknesses.
The consequence is that schools systematically track students to
produce (perhaps inadvertently) a self-fulfilling prophecy in which
those with the most educational advantages are propelled d forward
at faster rates than those from at-risk backgrounds.3
3
5
Research has found that acceleration and enrichment work for
;744tecent work on the identification and nurturing ofERE BUIribilli:1'talent argues the efficacy of enriched instructional practices and
licurriculuM for all students.5 Indeed, Accelerated Schools have
sh -substantial gains in student achievement, attendance, full
inclusion of special needs children in the mainstream, parental
participation, and numbers of students meeting traditional gifted
and talented criteria.6 They have also reduced the numbers of
students repeating grades and produced substantial numbers of
research projects and writing accomplishments of students.
A Strateay for Chance
Although a design for Accelerated Schools had been developed
by the early Spring of 1986,7 it was not until the 1986-87 school
year that the ideas could be tested. Starting with two pilot
schools in that year, the movement had grown to over 500 elementary
and middle schools by 1993-94 and 10 regional centers. Although
the basic ideas can be found even in our early writings,
application of these ideas was challenging and has required
continuous refinement as experience has provided new insights. A
strategy for creating accelerated institutions required three major
changes in U.S. schools, changes that were in deep conflict with
current practices.9
(1) Unity of Purvose
Most schools that educate at-risk students seem to lack
central purpose. They are comprised of a composite of programs
that are largely disparate and piecemeal with no central vision.
4
1
Teachers tend to see their responsibilities extending no farther
crikiii aces in self-contained classrooms, while remedialERE Do amli
specialists work in isolation from each other and the regular
*lschool
cJ-Acceleration requires the establishment and pursuit of a
common purpose that serves as a focal point for the efforts of
parents, teachers, staff, and students. Such unity of purpose in
an Accelerated School focuses on bringing all children into.the
mainstream, where they can more fully benefit from stimulating,
school experiences. Unity of purpose must extend to the actions,
beliefs, practices, and commitments that transform school actions
rather than just a statement posted on the wall. The development of
this unity requires the combined efforts and commitment of all
students, parents, and staff.
(2) School-site Empowerment
Existing schools for at-risk students are largely dominated by
decisions made by entities that are far removed from the school
site and classroom. Federal and state governments and central
offices of school districts have established a compendium of