UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA UNIT: School of Education
AT GREENSBORO DEPT: Educational Leadership and
Cultural Foundations
COURSE SYLLABUS
1.
Course
Prefix and Number: ELC
694
2.
Course
Title: Organization
and Governance of Public Education
3.
Credits: 3.0
4. Course
Prerequisites/Corequisites:
5.
For
Whom Planned:
Required course for the Masters of School Administration.
6.
Instructor
Information:
Dr.
Carolyn Riehl
242
Curry Building
(336)
334-3492 (office)
(336)
834-9199 (home)
cjriehl@uncg.edu
Office
Hours:
By
appointment
7.
Course
Purpose/Catalog Description: Why and how public education is organized and governed at
the federal, state, and local levels.
Impact of historical, legal, moral, political, social, economic, and philosophical
forces, and the role of various interest groups.
8.
Teachers
Academy Conceptual Framework Mission Statement: The mission of professional
education at UNCG is to prepare and support the professional development of
caring, collaborative, and competent educators who work in diverse settings.
This mission is carried out in an environment that nurtures the active
engagement of all participants, values individual as well as cultural diversity
and recognizes the importance of reflection and integration of theory and
practice. UNCG's
professional education programs are guided by shared commitments to: (a) equity
and excellence in teaching, research, and service; (b) professional integrity
and ethical deliberation in dealing with students and colleagues (university-based,
school-based, and community-based); (c) the construction of a professional
knowledge base through collaboration and collegiality; and (d) the
dissemination of professional knowledge, skills and dispositions through the
preparation and continuing professional development of teachers, principals and
other school personnel.
9.
Course
Goals and/or Objectives/Student Learning Outcomes: Instructor's statement of learning
outcomes OR goals/objectives from state or national professional standards
(please identify the organization, e.g. DPI, CEC, etc.)
This course explores issues in educational governance
and policy in the United States at the federal, state, and local levels, with a
special focus on governance and policy development in North Carolina. Our goal will be to develop
understandings and skills that will enhance students' effectiveness as
knowledgeable and persuasive educational leaders within a nested system of
governance and organization. A key
emphasis of our work together will be on the critique of education policy – going
beyond understanding the rules and regulations themselves, we will examine
whether various educational policies are in fact good ideas for American
education.
The course will be organized as a collective
inquiry. That is, we will rely
upon the efforts and expertise of all class members in framing questions,
seeking information, developing analytic perspectives, and building knowledge
and skills regarding school governance and policy. The course will be a “web-enhanced” course;
about half of the class sessions will be held in the conventional manner on
campus, and half will occur in the virtual environment of the internet and the
world wide web.
10.
Teaching
Strategies: For
example, lecture, class discussion, group work, conferences, student
presentations, electronic chat room, etc.
11.
Evaluation
Methods and Guidelines for Assignments: Statement of how students will be evaluated in the course
and/or list of course requirements
The
success of this course will depend upon everyone’s consistent and
enthusiastic participation in the following activities.
An
important component of our work together is the close examination of readings
published in books and periodicals, as well as material available through the
web. In some cases, we will all
read the same material, but you will also be asked to read and discuss with
others (usually online) material that only you may see. Thus, students should be prepared to
read assigned materials carefully prior to the sessions for which they are
listed and to be actively engaged in class discussions and activities
pertaining to the readings. They
should also be prepared to search out, read, and summarize for other students
additional materials. This latter
activity is a very important part of the course!
Students
will gather information about a topic they select that is related to
educational governance and policy.
Students will obtain information from various sources (local schools and
district offices, the state legislature and Department of Public Instruction,
other Internet sources, and/or published material available in libraries and on
the Internet). Students should
prepare a 3-5 page written brief summarizing and critiquing essential
information about the topic, to be distributed to their classmates. In effect, we will work together to
produce a "primer" about school governance, organization, and policy. This activity will culminate in a
public presentation of policy briefs in a “poster session” for the
entire department and the School of Education community, on Wednesday, May 9.
We
will choose topics and discuss the assignment in detail during the second class
session. A rough draft of the
brief is due the week of April 17/18.
Final versions of all briefs will be due on May 9.
There
are many options for topics to choose.
One way to begin is to identify a specific educational problem, policy,
or issue in a context with which you are familiar that you would like to
explore further. Another would be
to select a more general historical, structural, or analytical topic in school
governance, organization, and policy.
Students can choose to investigate an issue introduced in class (e.g.,
the use of educational standards) or may choose a different topic such as
charter schools; teacher unions; home schooling; detracking in secondary
schools; history of North Carolina's state education department; history of
African-American schools in North Carolina; metropolitan desegregation plans;
same-sex schools and classrooms and other gender-related educational policies;
policies on homework or school uniforms; bilingual education; or inclusion
policies and programs for learners with special needs.
You
will be asked to attend at least one district school board meeting and two
site-based governance meetings during the term. These will be discussed in class – but don’t
save it for the last week!
Course
grades will be determined roughly as follows: class participation and email
discussion group participation – 60%; policy brief – 40%.
12.
Required
Text(s)/Readings/References: Use full citations
Assigned
journal articles and book chapters will be available from the UNCG library on
electronic reserve. The username
for reading electronic reserves in the spring term is “ereserves”
and the password is “view2001.”
One
book is required and can be purchased from an online vendor such as amazon.com or bn.com:
Linda
Darling-Hammond. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for
creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
13.
Topical
Outline: This might
also be your calendar. The course
outline should contain sufficient detail to permit assessment of agreement
between actual content and stated objectives and catalog description.
Weekly Schedule
Class
Activities:
·
Overview
of class schedule and assignments
·
Planning
for use of web resources and email discussion groups
·
Introduction
to educational governance and policy: Who governs American public schools? What is an educational policy?
·
What
this course does not cover
Key
Questions:
·
How
might local school leaders play a crucial role in educational governance and
policy?
·
How
can educational policies be summarized and analyzed succinctly?
·
What
important questions can/should be asked about educational policies?
Assignments:
1. Read the Introduction (pgs. 1-10) of
the following text: Robert B. Reich
(Ed.). (1988). The power of public ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2. Examine several analyses of policies
for social promotion and retention in grade.
Go to the
web site of the North Carolina Education Research Council at http://www.ga.unc.edu/21stcenturyschools/NCERC/. First, familiarize yourself with what
this group does. Then work through
the web site until you find the publication entitled “Research on retention
and social promotion: Synthesis and implications for policy.” Read it, using Adobe Acrobat
Reader.
Also read
the policy brief, “Repeating grades in school: Current practice and
research evidence,” from the Consortium for Policy Research in Education
(CPRE). The CPRE web site is:
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cpre/.
Take a look at the various sections of this web site, especially the
sections on policy briefs and policy bulletins under
“Publications.” Then
read the policy brief.
3. Locate and read at least two other
educational policy briefs online.
They can be about any topics that interest you, ranging from school
choice, vouchers, and charter schools, to teacher professional development, to
social studies curriculum policy.
Be prepared to comment on both the form and content of these policy
briefs in class. Please bring 2
copies to class – one for the instructor (with the web address included)
and another for your own use.
Many
groups and agencies engage in policy analysis and put some version of policy
briefs online. Here are some
sources where you might look:
Educational
advocacy and professional organizations:
·
National
School Boards Association: http://www.nsba.org
(look under
“Advocacy” for a policy brief about vouchers)
·
American
Federation of Teachers: http://www.aft.org (look under “AFT on the
Issues” for a number of policy statements)
·
National
Education Association: http://www.nea.org
·
American
Association of School Administrators: http://www.aasa.org
·
Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development: http://www.ascd.org
·
Phi Delta Kappa: http://www.pdkintl.org
·
National PTA: http://www.pta.org
·
National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics: http://www.nctm.org
University-based
education research centers
·
The
SERVE center at UNCG: http://www.serve.org (their publications are not generally
available online, but you should check out what they do and perhaps visit them
to pick up copies of publications).
·
The
Consortium for Policy Research in Education: http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cpre (this
has links to many related centers)
·
Rutgers
University: http://www.cepa.gse.rutgers.edu
(also has links to other centers)
Educational
think-tanks and private foundations:
·
The
Rand Corporation: http://www.rand.org
·
The
Hudson Institute: http://www.hudson.org//
·
The
Manhattan Institute: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/
·
American
Institutes of Research: http://www.air.org
·
The
American Prospect: http://www.prospect.org
4. Go to the website of a major newspaper
and see if you can find anything there about the educational policies
you’ve identified. Or read
what they say about other policies.
How does a newspaper convey policy information differently than other
sources? Try these:
·
Education
Week: http://www.edweek.org
·
New
York Times: www.nytimes.com
·
Washington
Post: www.washingtonpost.com
·
Los
Angeles Times: www.latimes.com
Class
Activities:
·
Detailed
discussion of policy brief assignment; selection of policies for policy briefs.
Key
Questions:
·
What
has the federal government recently been up to with regards to educational
policy? How does it try to
influence educational policy and practice at the state and local levels?
·
What
might change with the advent of the new Bush administration?
Assignments:
·
Go to
the Federal government’s website (www.ed.gov),
read the education headlines and the president’s and secretary’s
priorities.
·
Also
visit www.whitehouse.gov for old
times’ sake to see Clinton’s “record of progress.” Try to figure out exactly when (on or
around January 20th) this site changes!
·
Check
out what the new guy has in mind for education: www.georgebush.com
·
Peruse
the National Education Goals Panel website and see what the federal government
has tried to stress through this program: http://www.negp.gov.
·
Discuss
this information by responding to the first email discussion group topic.
Key
Questions:
§
What
is systemic reform?
§
How
does systemic reform redefine the relationships among various layers of the
educational system? Are we being
duped by systemic reform, or is it a really good idea?
Assignments:
·
Read
the following:
Brenda J. Turnbull.
(1986). Federal and state policy. In Jane Hannaway and Marlaine E.
Lockheed (Eds.), The contributions of the social sciences to educational
policy and practice: 1965-1985 (pp. 99-114).
Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
William
H. Clune. (1993). Systemic educational policy: A conceptual
framework. In Susan H. Fuhrman
(Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 125-140). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
CPRE
policy briefs on systemic reform.
Go to http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cpre,
then follow Publications link to Finance and Policy Briefs, to the publication
“Building Capacity for Education Reform” and “Challenges in
Systemic Education Reform.”
Key
Questions:
§
What
role do standards play in educational reform and accountability?
§
What
are we learning about our educational performance from the National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the Third International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS)?
§
What
important aims of education are not addressed by focusing on NAEP and TIMSS?
Assignments:
·
Read
Chapter 7 (“Creating standards without standardization”) in Linda
Darling-Hammond’s The
right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. (If you haven’t read the rest of the book, you might
want to skim through it.)
·
To
read about NAEP, visit http://www.nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/site/home.asp
and follow the link to policymakers.
·
To
read about TIMSS, visit http://nces.ed.gov/timss/
·
Also
read the CPRE Policy Brief entitled “From Research to Practice and Back
Again: TIMSS as a Tool for Educational Improvement” at http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cpre (you
should have CPRE bookmarked by now!)
·
Be
prepared to participate in an email discussion with your small group.
Key
Questions:
·
How
does North Carolina state policy influence what is taught in the schools in the
state?
·
What
are the “teeth” in state curriculum policies?
·
How
does the North Carolina policy on curriculum standards compare with other
states? And other countries?
·
Do
federal initiatives have an impact on state curriculum standards?
Assignments:
Go to the
Publications section of the CPRE web site at
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cpre/frames/pubs.html. Scroll down to find the CPRE policy brief on
“Developing Content Standards: Creating a Process for Change.” Read it.
Check out
the North Carolina state web site on the Standard Course of Study: http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/curriculum/. Read the SCS for a subject and a grade
level that you are very familiar with.
Go to the
web site for the Education Commission of the States. Browse a bit; this is a wonderful source for many
resources. Then choose a state
link and locate the curriculum standards for a comparable subject and grade
level in a different state – any one you’re interested in. Note: if you choose a state that ends
up not having curriculum standards, see if their web site has any comment on
that. Then do try to find a state
with standards, and comment on both in your posting.
RESPOND
TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS IN YOUR DISCUSSION GROUP:
1.
Briefly describe the NC curriculum standards you examined. Discuss what you, as a professional,
think are their strengths and weaknesses.
Are they a sufficient guide for teachers? Do they reflect "best
practice" for teaching that subject?
2.
Compare the NC standards with the other state’s standards. Which are
“better” and why?
3. Discuss how both sets of standards do
or do not reflect the general principles for content standards that are
described in the CPRE brief.
4. Make 2 suggestions for a principal who
might be struggling with how to help her teachers use these content standards,
or who might wonder how she can assess whether her teachers are using the
standards well.
5. Remember to comment on each of the
postings you receive.
Key
Questions:
·
What
functions do governors, state departments of education, and state legislatures
play in educational policymaking (not to mention the courts)?
·
How
has the state role in educational governance changed over time?
·
What
other actors participate in educational policy activity at the state level?
Assignments:
·
Read: Tim L. Mazzoni. (1994). State policy-making and school reform: Influences and
influentials. In Jay D. Scribner
and Donald H. Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics. The 1994 Commemorative Yearbook of the
Politics of Education Association (pp. 53-73).
Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
·
Also
read (on electronic reserves):
Kentucky's
conflicting reform principles, by Ken Jones and Betty Lou
Whitford.
KERA:
A tale of one teacher, by Holly Holland.
KERA:
A tale of one school, by Robert Rothman.
Class
Activities:
·
Guest
speaker, TBA
Assignments:
·
Read
“Results Count in Los Angeles” by Ilene M. Berman, Christopher T.
Cross, and Joan Evans; “Portrait of a Benchmark School” by Gordon
Cawelti, “SMART Goals, SMART Schools” by Jan O’Neill,
“Results, Results, Results?” by Dale Wallace, and “The SOL:
No Easy answers,” by Raymond Pasi.
(All are articles from the February 2000 issue of Educational
Leadership.)
·
Read
materials on the web and from your school about the ABC program.
March 6/7: UNCG Spring Break. No Class.
Key
Questions:
·
How
are local schools using the accountability system?
·
What
intended and unintended results is the system having?
Assignments:
·
Read
“The Impact of High-Stakes Testing on Teachers and Students in North
Carolina” by M. Gail Jones et al., “Assessment-Driven Reform: The
Emperor Still Has No Clothes” by Al Ramirez, and “Standards for
Standards-Based Accountability Systems” by Kenneth A. Sirotnik and Kathy
Kimball. (All are from the
November 1999 issue of Phi Delta Kappan.)
·
Bring
in materials on the use of assessment information in a school with which you
are familiar.
Key
Questions:
·
What
other policy initiatives are developing at the state level?
Assignments:
·
Check
out the web sites for the state’s Department of Public Instruction, and
the Governor's web site, to see what issues are coming up. (www.dpi.state.nc.us
and www.governor.state.nc.us)
·
Read
about the state’s new policy focus on closing the achievement gap at: http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/closingthegap/
·
Look
for resources on other state-level policies.
·
Be prepared
to participate in your email discussion group.
Key
Questions:
·
What
are the roles and functions of local school boards, school district
administrators, teachers, parents, and students regarding educational policy
and practice?
·
How
are local actors affected by other levels of the educational system?
·
Is the
local school board a dinosaur?
Assignments:
·
Read
the following:
Richard
F. Elmore. (1993). The role of local school districts in
instructional improvement. In
Susan H. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the
system (pp.
96-124). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Jacqueline P. Danzberger. (1994). Governing the nation's schools: The
case for restructuring local school boards. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(5), 367-373.
·
On the
web, read the CPRE policy brief, “The District Role in Building Capacity:
Four Strategies.”
·
Read,
clip, and bring to class selected newspaper articles about local educational
policy activity in your area.
·
Attend
a local school board meeting, or watch one on cable TV. Be prepared to describe and critique
the topics that were discussed and how individuals participated in the
discussions and decision making.
Key
Questions:
·
What
kinds of decisions are actually made at the school level?
·
How
does governance really take place in your school?
Assignments:
·
Read
the following article:
Shields,
Patrick M., & Knapp, Michael S.
(1997). The promise and
limits of school-based reform: A national snapshot. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(4), 288-294.
·
Attend
at least two site-based governance meetings at a school of your choice. Take field notes and complete a summary
form for each meeting (to be developed in class). Be prepared to discuss in detail whether you think the
school has effective participatory governance and what a local administrator
might do about it.
Assignment:
·
Confer
with other members about policy briefs.
·
How do
local educational practitioners respond to policy initiatives?
Assignments:
·
Read
the following two articles:
David K.
Cohen. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case
of Mrs. Oublier. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 327-345.
Knapp,
Michael S. (1997). Between systemic reforms and the
mathematics and science classroom: The dynamics of innovation, implementation,
and professional learning. Review
of Educational Research, 67(2), 227-266.
·
Check
out the debate on the NSF rural education science and mathematics initiative by
going to http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v8n17/ and then following clues to related sites.
·
Be
prepared to participate in your email discussion group.
Key
Questions:
·
Revisiting
the idea of educational policy as a broad conversation, how can local school
leaders participate more effectively in these conversations?
Activities:
·
Readings
TBA.
·
Participate
in email discussion group.
Students
may make appointments to meet individually with the professor.
14.
Other
Information: Any
other items you normally include on your course syllabus such as Academic Honor
Code, Attendance Policy, Additional Requirements, etc.
15.
Recommended
Text(s) and/or Readings: A bibliography or list of references highlighting recent scholarship
(pedagogy and research) in the subject area
Recommended Readings
Federal
involvement in education:
Catherine
Marshall, Douglas Mitchell, and Frederick Wirt. (1989). Culture
and Education Policy in the American States. New
York: Falmer Press.
Robert T.
Stout, Marilyn Tallerico, and Kent Paredes Scribner. (1995). Values:
the ‘what?’ of the politics of education. In Jay D. Scribner and Donald H. Layton (Eds.), The Study
of Educational Politics. The 1994
Commemorative Yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (pp. 5-20). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
Linda
Darling-Hammond and Jon Snyder.
(1992). Reframing
accountability: Creating learner-centered schools. In Ann Lieberman (Ed.), The changing contexts of teaching (pp. 11-36). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kathryn
M. Borman, Peter W. Cookson, Jr., Alan R. Sadovnik, and Joan Z. Spade
(Eds.). (1996). Implementing educational reform:
Sociological perspectives on educational policy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Kevin J.
Dougherty. (1996). Opportunity-to-learn standards: A
sociological critique. Sociology of Education, Special Issue on Sociology and
Educational Policy: Bringing Scholarship and Practice Together, 40-65.
Amy
Stuart Wells and Jeannie Oakes.
(1996). Potential pitfalls
of systemic reform: Early lessons from research on detracking. Sociology of Education, Special
Issue on Sociology and Educational Policy: Bringing Scholarship and Practice
Together, 135-143.
Harold W.
Stevenson and James W. Stigler.
(1992). The learning
gap: Why our schools are failing and what we can learn from Japanese and
Chinese education. New York: Summit Books.
David
Easton. (1965). A Framework for Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
R. Martin
and P. McClure. (1969). Title I of ESEA: Is it Helping Poor
Children? Washington, DC: Washington Research
Project and NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.
State
involvement in educational governance:
Douglas
E. Mitchell. (1988). Educational politics and policy: The
state level. In Norman J. Boyan
(Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Administration (pp. 453-466). New York: Longman.
David
Tyack and Thomas James.
(1986). State government
and American public education: Exploring the "primeval forest." History of Education Quarterly, 26(1), 39-69.
Michael B. Katz.
(1992). Chicago school reform as history. Teachers College Record, 94(1), 56-72.
Susan H.
Fuhrman and Richard F. Elmore.
(1995). Ruling out rules:
The evolution of deregulation in state education policy. Teachers College Record, 97(2), 279-309.
Loveless,
Tom, & Jasin, Claudia.
(1998). Starting from
scratch: Political and organizational challenges facing charter schools. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 34(1),
9-30.
Well, Amy
Stuart, Grutzik, Cynthia, Carnochan, Sibyll, Slayton, Julie, & Vasudeva,
Ash. (1999). Underlying policy assumptions of
charter school reform: The multiple meanings of a movement. Teachers College Record, 100(3), 513-535
Local
educational governance:
Susan H.
Fuhrman (Ed.). Designing coherent
education policy: Improving the system. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Elizabeth
L. Useem. (1992). Middle schools and math groups:
Parents' involvement in children's placement. Sociology of Education, 65, 263-279.
David
Tyack. (1997). Civic education -- What roles for
citizens? Educational
Leadership, 54(5),
22-24.
Deborah
Meier. (1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons
for America from a small school in Harlem. Boston:
Beacon Press.
Spillane, James P.
(1998). A cognitive perspective on the role of
the local educational agency in implementing instructional policy: Accounting
for local variability. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 34(1), 31-57.
The
influence of policy on educational practice:
Michael
Lipsky. (1976). Toward a theory of street-level
bureaucracy. In Willis D. Hawley
and Michael Lipsky (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on urban politics (pp. 186-212). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Richard
Weatherley and Michael Lipsky.
(1977). Street-level bureaucrats
and institutional innovation: Implementing special-education reform. Harvard Educational Review, 47(2), 171-197.
Paul
Berman and Milbrey W. McLaughlin.
(1978). Federal Programs
Supporting Educational Change. Santa Monica,
CA: Rand Corporation.
Paul
Berman. (1981). Educational change: An implementation
paradigm. In Rolf Lehming and
Michael Kane (Eds.), Improving Schools: Using What We Know (pp. 253-286). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
McLaughlin,
Milbrey Wallin. (1989). The RAND Change Agent Study Ten
Years Later: Macro Perspectives and Micro Realities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association (San Francisco, CA, March 27-30, 1989).
Michael
Huberman, Matthew B. Miles, with Beverly Loy Taylor and Jo Ann Goldberg.
(1982). Innovation Up Close: A
Field Study in Twelve School Settings. Volume IV from
A Study of Dissemination Efforts Supporting School Improvement. The Network,
Inc., Andover, MA.
Huberman,
A. Michael and Matthew B. Miles.
(1984). Rethinking the Quest for School Improvement: Some Findings from
the DESSI Study. Teachers College Record, 86(1), 34-54.
Diversity
and educational policy:
Gloria
Ladson-Billings and Annette Henry.
(1990). Blurring the
borders: Voices of African liberatory pedagogy in the United States and
Canada. Journal of Education,
172(2), 72-88.
Michele
Foster. (1993). Educating for competence in community
and culture: Exploring the views of exemplary African-American teachers. Urban Education, 27(4), 370-394.
Lisa D.
Delpit. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and
pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280-298.
Mary M.
Kennedy (Ed.). (1991). Teaching academic subjects to
diverse learners. New York: Teachers College Press.
Michele
Foster. (1995). African American teachers and
culturally relevant pedagogy. In
James A. Banks and Cherry A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on
multicultural education (pp. 570-581). New York:
Macmillan.
E.
Ellsworth. (1989). Why doesn't this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of
critical pedagogy. Harvard
Educational Review, 59(3), 297-324.
Michele
Foster. (1994). The role of community and culture in
school reform efforts: Examining the views of African-American teachers. Educational Foundations, 8(2), 5-26.
Gloria
Ladson-Billings. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant
pedagogy. American Educational
Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
Gloria
Ladson-Billings. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful
teachers of African American children. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Mary H.
Metz. (1990). How social class differences shape
teachers' work. In M. W.
McLaughlin, J. E. Talbert, & N. Bascia (Eds.), The contexts of teaching
in secondary schools: Teachers' realities (pp. 40-107).
New York: Teachers College Press.
Impacting
the policy system:
Carol
Axtell Ray and Rosalyn A. Mickelson.
(1990). Corporate leaders,
resistant youth, and school reform in Sunbelt City. Social Problems, 37, 178-190.
Charles
Taylor Kerchner and Krista D. Caufman.
(1995). Lurching toward
professionalism: The saga of teacher unionism. Elementary School Journal, 96(1), 107-122.
Nina
Bascia. (1994). Unions in teachers’
professional lives: Social, intellectual, and practical concerns. New York: Teachers College Press.
Susan
Moore Johnson. (1988). Pursuing professional reform in
Cincinnati. Phi Delta
Kappan, 69(10), 746-751.
Charles
T. Kerchner and Douglas E. Mitchell.
(1986). Teaching reform and
union reform. Elementary School
Journal, 86(4),
449-470.
Lois
Weiner. (1996). Teachers, unions, and school reform:
Examining Margaret Haley's vision.
Educational Foundations, 10(3), 85-96.