Acker-Hocever, M., and Touchton, D. (2001, April). Principals' struggle to level the accountability playing field of Florida graded “D” and “F” schools in high poverty and minority communities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar

Airasian, P. W. (1994). Classroom assessment (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Amrein, A., and Berliner, D. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(18). Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/.Google Scholar

Anderson, L. W. (1983). Policy implications of research on school time. School Administrator, 40, 25–28.Google Scholar

Anderson, S. (2003). The school district role in educational change: A review of the literature. Unpublished manuscript.

Anyon, J. (1997). Ghetto schooling: A political economy of urban educational reform. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Armor, D., Conry-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., Pauly, E., and Zellman, G. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading program in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar

Ascher, C. (1985). Raising Hispanic achievement (ERIC/CUE Digest 26). New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education (ED 256 842).Google Scholar

August, D., and Hakuta, K. (1998). Educating language-minority children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Austin, G., and Holowenzak, S. P. (1985). An examination of 10 years of research on exemplary schools. In Austin, G. and Garber, H. (Eds.), Research on Exemplary Schools. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Bahktin, M. M. (1981). The dialogical imagination: Four essays. (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.), Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar

Baker, E. L. (1992). Issues in policy, assessment, and equity. Los Angeles: Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California at Los Angeles. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 349 823).Google Scholar

Bamburg, J. D. (1994). Raising expectations to improve student learning. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.Google Scholar

Bangert-Downs, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., and Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effects of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bascia, N. (1996). Caught in the crossfire: Restructuring, collaboration and the “problem” school. Urban Education, 31(2), 177–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, S., and Allexsaht-Snider, M. (2001). Recent language minority education policy in Georgia: Appropriation, assimilation, and Americanization. In Wortham, S., Murillo, E. Jr., and Hamann, T. (Eds.), Education, Policy, and the Politics of Identity in the New Latino Diaspora. Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar

Benard, B. (1993). Fostering resiliency in kids: Protective factors in the family, school, and community. Educational Leadership, 51(3), 44–48.Google Scholar

Berends, M. (2000). Teacher-reported effects of New American Schools' designs: Exploring relationships to teacher background and school context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berends, M., Bodilly, S., and Kirby, S. (2003). District and school leadership for whole school reform: The experience of New American Schools. In Murphy, J. and Datnow, A. (Eds.), Leadership for school reform: Lessons from comprehensive school reform designs (pp. 109–131). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

Berends, M., Chun, J., Schuyler, G., Stockly, S., and Briggs, R. (2001). Challenges of conflicting school reforms: Effects of New American Schools in a high-poverty district (MR-1483-EDU). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar

Bernie, R., and Stiefel, L. (1999). Concepts of school finance. In Ladd, H., Chalk, R., and Hansen, J. (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: Issues and perspectives (pp. 7–34). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Bickel, W. E. (1998). The implications of the effective schools literature for school restructuring. In Reynolds, C. R. and Gutkin, T. B. (Eds.), The handbook of school psychology (3rd ed.) (pp. 959–983). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Billig, S., Perry, S., and Pokorny, N. (1999). School support teams: Building state capacity for improving schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 4, 231–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blum, R., and Butler, J. (1987). Onward to excellence: Teaching schools to use effective schooling and implementation research to improve student performance. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.Google Scholar

Bodilly, S. (1998). Lessons from New American Schools' Scale-Up Phase: Prospects for bringing designs to multiple schools (RAND research report). Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR942/.Google Scholar

Bodilly, S . (2001). New American Schools' concept of break-the-mold designs: How designs evolved over time and why (RAND research report). Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1288/.Google Scholar

Bodilly, S. J., and Berends, M. (1999). Necessary district support for comprehensive school reform. In Orfield, G. and DeBray, E. H. (Eds.), Hard work for good schools: Facts not fads in Title I reform (pp. 111–119). Boston: Civil Rights Project, Harvard University.Google Scholar

Borman, G., Hewes, G., Overman, L., and Brown, S. (2002). Comprehensive School Reform and student achievement: A meta-analysis. Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar

Borman, G., Wong, K.,Hedges, L. V., and Agostino, D' J. K. (1998). The longitudinal achievement of Chapter 1 students: Preliminary evidence from the Prospects study. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 3, 363–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Borman, K. M., Kromrey, J., Katzenmeyer, W., and Piana, Della G. (2000, April). How do standards matter? Linking policy to practice in four cities implementing systemic reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In Richardson, J. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar

Brewer, J., and Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Brookover, W. B. (1985). Can we make schools effective for minority students?Journal of Negro Education, 54, 257–268.

Brookover, W. B., Beady, C., Flood, P., Schweitzer, J., and Wisenbaker, J. (1979). Schools, social systems and student achievement: Schools can make a difference. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar

Brookover, W. B., and Lezotte, L. W. (1979). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing: Institute for Research on Teaching College of Education, Michigan State University.Google Scholar

Brophy, J. E. (1982). Successful teaching strategies for the inner-city child. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 527–530.Google Scholar

Brophy, J. E. (1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist, 4, 1069–1077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brophy, J. E. (1988). Educating teachers about managing classrooms and students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 1–18.Google Scholar

Brophy, J. E . (1996). Teaching problem students. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar

Brophy, J. E., and Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In Wittrock, M. (Ed.), Third Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 328–375). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Brown, B. W., and Saks, D. H. (1986). Measuring the effects of instructional time on student learning: Evidence from the Beginning Teacher Evaluation Study. American Journal of Education, 94, 480–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bryk, A., and Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Bryk, A., Sebring, P., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S., and Easton, J. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform democratic localism as a lever for change. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar

Byrnes, D., and Kiger, G. (1987). Structural correlates of school children's religious intolerance. Educational Research Quarterly, 11(3), 18–25.Google Scholar

Byrnes, D. A. (1988). Children and prejudice. Social Education, 52, 267–271.Google Scholar

Campbell, D. T., and Stanley, J. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental design for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar

Campbell, R. L., and Farrell, R. V. (1985). The identification of competencies for multi-cultural teacher education. Negro Educational Review, 36, 137–144.Google Scholar

Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. (1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Author.

Carnoy, M., Loeb, S., and Smith, T. L. (2000, April). Do higher state scores in Texas make for better high school outcomes? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.Google Scholar

Cawelti, G. (2003). Lessons from research that changed education. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 18–21.Google Scholar

Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence. (2002). The five standards for effective pedagogy. Retrieved April 28, 2005, http:www.crede.ucsc.edu/standards/standards.html.

Chrispeels, J. H. (1992). Purposeful restructuring: Creating a culture for learning and achievement in elementary schools. London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Chrispeels, J. H. (2002a). The California Center for Effective Schools: The Oxnard school district partnership. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 382–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chrispeels, J. H. (2002b). An emerging conceptual and practical framework for implementing district-wide effective schools reform. Journal for Effective Schools, 1, 17–30.Google Scholar

Chrispeels, J. H., Castillo, S., and Brown, J. H. (2000). School leadership teams: A Process model. School Effectiveness and Improvement, 11, 20–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chrispeels, J. H., and Martin, K. J. (2002). Four leadership teams define their roles within organizational and political structures to improve student learning. School Effectiveness and Improvement, 13, 327–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christman, J. (2001). Powerful ideas, modest gains: Five years of systemic reform in Philadelphia middle schools. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/children05.pdf.Google Scholar

Christman, J. R., and Rhodes, A. (2002). Civic engagement and urban school improvement: Hard to learn lessons from Philadelphia. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/children07.pdf.Google Scholar

Chun, T., and Goertz, M. (1999). Title I and state educational policy: High standards for all students? In Orfield, G. and DeBray, E. (Eds.) Hard work for good schools: Facts not fads in Title I reforms. Cambridge, MA: Civil Rights Project, Harvard University.Google Scholar

Cibulka, J. G., and Derlin, R. L. (1998). Accountability policy adoption to policy sustainability: Reforms and systemic initiatives in Colorado and Maryland. Education and Urban Society, 30, 502–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clune, W. (1998). Toward a theory of systemic reform: The case of nine NSF statewide systemic initiatives (Research monograph No. 16). Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education.Google Scholar

Clune, W. (2001). Toward a theory of standards-based reform: The case of nine NSF statewide systemic initiatives. In Fuhrman, S. (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the United States (pp. 13–39). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy. (2002). Bringing evidence-driven progress to education: A recommended strategy for the U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: Author.

Cohen, D., and Ball, D. (2001). Making change: Instruction and its improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, D., and Hill, H. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collier, V. P. (1992). A synthesis of studies examining long-term language minority student data on academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 187–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Comer, J. P., Haynes, N. M., Joyner, E. T., and BenAvie, M. (1996). Rallying the whole village: The Comer process for reforming education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (1998). States and districts and Comprehensive School Reform (CPRE Policy Brief). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/rb24.pdf.

Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Core Knowledge Foundation. (1998). Core Knowledge Sequence: Content guidelines for grades K–8. Charlottesville, VA: Core Knowledge Foundation.

Cotton, K. (1995). Effective schooling practices: A research synthesis – 1995 update. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved June 5, 2003, from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/esp/esp95toc.html.Google Scholar

Creemers, B. P. M. (1994). The effective classroom. London: Cassell.Google Scholar

Creemers, B. P. M., and Reezigt, G. J. (1996). School level conditions affecting the effectiveness of instruction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7, 197–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Creemers, B. P. M., and Scheerens, J. (1994). Developments in the educational effectiveness research programme. In Bosker, R. J., Creemers, B. P. M., and Scheerens, J. (Eds.), Conceptual and methodological advances in educational effectiveness research. Special issue of International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 125–140.

Cronbach, L. J. (1982). Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Crone, J., Lang, M., Franklin, B., and Halbrook, A. (1994). Composite versus component scores: Consistency of school effectiveness classification. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 303–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crone, L., and Teddlie, C. (1995). Further examination of teacher behavior in differentially effective schools: Selection and socialization processes. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 30, 1–9.Google Scholar

Crone, L. J., Lang, M. H., Teddlie, C., and Franklin, B. (1995). Achievement measures of school effectiveness: Comparison of model stability across years. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8, 365–377.Google Scholar

Cross, C. (2004). Political education: National policy comes of age. New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

Cuban, L. (1989). At-risk students: What teachers and principals can do. Educational Leadership, 46(5), 29–32.Google Scholar

Cuban, L. (1993). Preface. In Teddlie, C. and Stringfield, S. (Eds.), Schools make a difference: Lessons learned from a 10-year study of school effects (pp. ix–xi). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Cuban, L. (2003). Why is it so hard to get good schools?New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard Educational Review, 56, 18–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dalton, S. (1998). Pedagogy matters: Standards for effective teaching practice (Research Report No. 4). Washington, DC, and Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence.Google Scholar

Amico, D' L., Harwell, M., Stein, M., and Heuvel, J. (2001, April). Examining the implementation and effectiveness of a district-wide instructional improvement effort. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar

Darder, A., and Upshur, C. (1992). What do Latino children need to succeed in school? A study of four Boston public schools (Document No. 92-02). Boston: Boston Public Schools (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 344 951).Google Scholar

Darling-Hammond, L., and Ball, D. (1998). Teaching for high standards: What policymakers need to know and be able to do. Consortium for Policy Research in Education Joint Report Series. University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education: CPRE Publications.Google Scholar

Darling-Hammond, L., Hightower, A., Husbands, J., LaFors, J., and Young, V. (2002, April). Building instructional quality: Inside-out, bottom-up, and top-down: Perspectives on San Diego's school reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Darling-Hammond, L., Hightower, A. M., Husbands, J. L., LaFors, J. R., Young, V. M., and Christopher, C. (2003, September). Building instructional quality: “Inside-out” and “outside-in” perspectives on San Diego's school reform. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington. Retrieved February 24, 2004, from http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/InstructionalQual-09-2003.pdf.Google Scholar

Datnow, A. (2000). Power and politics in the adoption of school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(4), 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Datnow, A. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform in changing district and state contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 121–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Datnow, A., Borman, G., and Stringfield, S. (2000). School reform through a highly specified curriculum: A study of the implementation and effects of the Core Knowledge Sequence. Elementary School Journal, 101, 167–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Datnow, A., Borman, G., Stringfield, S., Overman, L., and Castellano, M. (2003). Comprehensive school reform in culturally and linguistically diverse contexts: Implementation and outcomes from a four-year study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 143–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Datnow, A., and Castellano, M. (2001). Managing and guiding school reform: Leadership in Success for All schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 219–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Datnow, A., Hubbard, L., and Mehan, H. (2002). Extending educational reform: From one school to many. London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar

Datnow, A., and Kemper, E. (2002, March). From statehouse to schoolhouse: The implementation of Comprehensive School Reform in the era of CSRD (Report prepared as a deliverable to OERI, U.S. Department of Education for CRESPAR Project 4.2.). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar

Datnow, A., and Kemper, E. (2003). Connections between federal, state, and local levels in the implementation of Comprehensive School Reform. Unpublished manuscript.

Datnow, A., and Stringfield, S. (2000). Working together for reliable school reform. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 5, 183–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davis, B. R. (1985). Effects of cooperative learning on race/human relations: Study of a district program. Spectrum, 3, 37–43.Google Scholar

Deal, T. E., and Peterson, K. D. (1990). The principal's role in shaping school cultures. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar

Desimone, L. (2000). Making Comprehensive School Reform work. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.Google Scholar

Desimone, L., Porter, A., Garet, M., Yoon, Suk K., and Birman, B. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year long study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

DeVries, D. L., Edwards, K. J., and Slavin, R. E. (1978). Biracial learning teams and race relations in the classroom: Four field experiments using Teams-Games-Tournament. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 356–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel. New York: Norton.Google Scholar

Dreeben, R. (1987). Closing the divide: What teachers and administrators can do to help black students reach their reading potential. American Educator, 11(4), 28–35.Google Scholar

Druian, G., and Butler, J. A. (1987). Effective schooling practices and at-risk youth: What the research shows (Topical Synthesis No. 1). Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 291 146).Google Scholar

Duncombe, W., and Yinger, J. (1999). Performance standards and educational cost indexes: You can't have one without the other. In Ladd, H., Chalk, R., and Hansen, J. (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: Issues and perspectives, pp. 260–298. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Dyer, H. S., Linn, R. L., and Patton, M. J. (1969). A comparison of four methods of obtaining discrepancy measures based on observed and predicted school system means on achievement tests. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 591–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Edmonds, R. R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(10), 15–24.Google Scholar

Edmonds, R. R. (1981). Making public schools effective. Social Policy, 12, 56–60.Google Scholar

Education Commission of the States. (1999). Comprehensive School Reform: Five lessons from the field.Denver, CO: Author.

Elmore, R. (1993). The role of local districts in instructional improvement. In Fuhrman, S. (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy improving the system (pp. 96–125). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Elmore, R. (2002, April). Stakes for whom? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Elmore, R. F., and Burney, D. (1997). School variation and systemic instructional improvement in Community School District #2, New York City. Unpublished manuscript.

Elmore, R. F., and Burney, D. (1998). Continuous improvement in Community District #2, New York City. Unpublished manuscript.

Elmore, R., and Fuhrman, S. (2001). Holding schools accountable: Is it working. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Epstein, J. L. (1997). School, family, and community partnerships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar

Erickson, F., and Shultz, J. (1982). The counselor as gatekeeper. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Erlichson, B., and Goertz, M. (2001). Implementing whole school reform in New Jersey: Year Two. New Brunswick, NJ: Department of Public Policy and Center for Government Services, Rutgers, University of New Jersey.Google Scholar

Evans, L., and Teddlie, C. (1995). Facilitating change in schools: Is there one best style? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 6, 1–22.

Fairman, J., and Firestone, W. (2001). The district role in state assessment policy: An exploratory study. In Fuhrman, S. (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the States (pp. 124–147). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Fiedler, F. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Fiedler, F. (1973). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 60–112.Google Scholar

Fillmore, L. W., and Valadez, C. (1986). Teaching bilingual learners. In Wittrock, M. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, third edition (pp. 648–685). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Finnigan, K., Day, O' J., and Wakelyn, D. (2003). External support to schools on probation: Getting a leg up?Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 24, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/Chicago.pdf.Google Scholar

Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1996). Monitoring education: Indicators, quality and effectiveness. New York: Cassell.Google Scholar

Flanagan, A., and Grissmer, D. (2001, February). The role of federal resources in closing the achievement gaps of minority and disadvantaged students. Brookings conference on the Black-White Test Score Gap, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Foley, E . (1998). Restructuring student support services: Redefining the role of the school district. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/careport01.pdf.Google Scholar

Foley, E. (2001). Contradictions and control in systemic reform: The ascendancy of the central office in Philadelphia schools. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/children03.pdf.Google Scholar

Fuhrman, S., Goertz, M., and Duffy, M. (2002, April). “Slow down, you move too fast”: The politics of making changes in high-stakes accountability policies for students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Fuller, J., and Johnson, E. (2001). Can state accountability systems drive improvements in school improvement for children of color and children from low-income homes. Education and Urban Society, 33, 261–263.Google Scholar

Gabelko, N. H. (1988). Prejudice reduction in secondary schools. Social Education, 52, 276–279.Google Scholar

Gage, N. (1989). The paradigm wars and their aftermath: A “historical” sketch of research and teaching since 1989. Educational Researcher, 18, 4–10.Google Scholar

Gallo, D. (1989). Educating for empathy, reason and imagination. Journal of Creative Behavior, 23, 98–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garcia, E. E. (1988). Attributes of effective schools for language minority students. Education and Urban Society, 2, 387–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Garcia, E. E., and Gonzalez, R. (1995). Issues in systemic reform for culturally and linguistically diverse students. Teachers College Record, 96, 418–431.Google Scholar

Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Gettinger, M. (1984). Achievement as a function of time spent in learning and time needed for learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 617–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gettinger, M. (1989). Effects of maximizing time spent and minimizing time needed for learning on pupil achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gewertz, C. (2002, August 7). Philadelphia lines up outside groups to run schools. Education Week 21(43), 1, 18, 19.Google Scholar

Gimmestad, B. J., and Chiara, E. (1982). Dramatic plays: A vehicle for prejudice reduction in the elementary school. Journal of Educational Research, 76, 45–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Glaser, M. (1992). After the alternative elementary program: A promise of continued student success?Urban Review, 24, 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goertz, M., Duffy, M., and Le Floch, K. C. (2001). Assessment and accountability systems in the 50 states: 1999–2000 (CPRE Research Report Series RR-046). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/rr46.pdf.

Goldenberg, C. (1996). Effective schooling for LEP students: The school domain. Paper prepared for the Committee on Developing a Research Agenda on the Education of Limited English Proficient and Bilingual Students. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar

Good, T. L. (1987). Two decades of research on teacher expectations: Findings and future directions. Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), 32–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Good, T. L., and Brophy, J. E. (1986). School effects. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Third handbook of research on teaching (pp. 570–602). New York: Macmillan.

Goodson, I. (2000). Social histories of educational change theory. Journal of Educational Change, 2, 45–63.Google Scholar

Grant, C. A., Sleeter, C. E., and Anderson, J. E. (1986). The literature on multicultural education: Review and analysis. Educational Studies, 12, 47–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., and Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grissmer, D., and Flanagan, A. (1998). Exploring rapid achievement gains in North Carolina and Texas. Washington, DC: National Educational Goals Panel.Google Scholar

Grissmer, D., Flanagan, A., Kawata, J., and Williamson, S. (2000). Improving student achievement: What state and NAEP test scores tell us. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, MR-924-EDU.Google Scholar

Griswold, P. A., Cotton, K. J., and Hansen, J. B. (1986). Effective compensatory education sourcebook, Volume I: A review of effective educational practices. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 276 787).Google Scholar

Grossman, F. K., Beinashowitz, J., Anderson, L., Sakurai, M., Finnin, L., and Flaherty, M. (1992). Risk and resilience in young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 529–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Guba, E. G., and Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Guthrie, J., and Rothstein, R. (1999). Enabling “adequacy” to achieve reality: Translating adequacy into state school finance distribution. In Ladd, H., Chalk, R., and Hansen, J. (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: Issues and perspectives (pp. 209–260). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Hall, G. E., Rutherford, W. L., Hord, S. M., and Huling, L. L. (1984). Effects of three principalship styles on school improvement. Educational Leadership, 41, 22–29.Google Scholar

Hall, P. M., and McGinty, P. J. W. (1997). Policy as the transformation of intentions: Producing program from statutes. Sociological Quarterly, 38, 439–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hallinger, P., and Murphy, J. (1986). The social context of effective schools. American Journal of Education, 94, 328–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamann, E. (2002, April). The politics of bilingual education, Latino student accommodation, and school district management in Southern Appalachia. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Hamann, E . (2003). The educational welcome of Latinos in the New South. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar

Hamann, E., and Lane, B. (2002). “We're from the state and we're here to help”: State-level innovations in support of high school improvement. Providence, RI: Education Alliance for Equity in the Nation's Schools, Brown University.Google Scholar

Hamann, E., Zuliani, I., and Hudak, M. (2002, April). English Language Learners, comprehensive school reforms, and state departments of education: An unbridged dichotomy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Haney, W. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy analysis archives, 8. Retrieved April 15, 2001, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hannaway, J. (2003). Accountability, assessment, and performance issues: We've come a long way, or have we? In Boyd, W. L. and Miretzky, D. (Eds.), American educational governance on trial: Change and challenges (pp. 20–37). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hargreaves, D. H., and Hopkins, D. (1991). The empowered school: The management and practice of developing planning. London: Cassell.Google Scholar

Harwell, M., Amico, D' L., Stein, M., and Gatti, G. (2000). Professional development and the achievement gap in Community School District #2. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, HPLC Project, Learning Research and Development Center.Google Scholar

Hatch, T. (2000). What happens when improvement programs collide. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 10.Google Scholar

Helsby, G. (1999). Changing teachers' work. Buckingham, United Kingdom: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Henig, J., Hula, R., Orr, M., and Pedescleaux, D. (1999). The color of school reform: Race, politics, and the challenge of urban education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Herman, R., Aladjem, D., McMahon, P., Masem, E., Mulligan, I., Malley, O' A., Quinones, S., Reeve, A., and Woodruff, D. (1999). An educators' guide to schoolwide reform. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.Google Scholar

Hess, F. (1999). Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar

Hightower, A. (2002a). San Diego's big boom: Systemic instructional change in the central office and schools. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 76–94). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

Hightower, A. (2002b). San Diego's big boom: District bureaucracy supports culture of learning (Research Report). Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/SanDiego-AH-01-2002.pdf.Google Scholar

Hill, H., Cohen, D., and Moffitt, S. (1999). Instruction, poverty, and performance. In Orfield, G. and DeBray, E. (Eds.), Hard work for good schools: Facts not fads in Title I reforms. Cambridge, MA: Civil Rights Project, Harvard University.Google Scholar

Hill, P., Campbell, C., and Harvey, J. (2000). It takes a city getting serious about urban school reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar

Hopkins, D. (2002). The Aga Khan Foundation school improvement initiative: An international change perspective. In Anderson, S. E. (Ed.), Improving schools through teacher development: Case studies of the Aga Kahn Foundation Projects in East Africa (pp. 271–296). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Horn, J. (2000a). A case study of the Humphreys County (Mississippi) School District and its role as a partner in the NSF-supported Delta Rural Systemic Initiative (RSI). Evaluation Report. Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University, Evaluation Center. Paper retrieved May, 15, 2002, from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/rsi/humphreys.html.Google Scholar

Horn, J . (2000b). A case study of Rockcastle County (Kentucky) School District and its role as a partner in the NSF-supported Appalachian Rural Systemic Initiative. Prepared for the NSF Rural Systemic Initiatives Evaluation Study. Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University, Evaluation Center. Retrieved September 15, 2002, from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/rsi/rockcastle.html.Google Scholar

Jennings, J. (2000). Title I: Its legislative history and its promise. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(7), 516–522.Google Scholar

Kearns, D., and Anderson, J. (1996). Sharing the vision: Creating New American Schools. In Stringfield, S., Ross, S., and Smith, L. (Eds.), Bold plans for school restructuring (pp. 9–23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Kemper, E., Stringfield, S., and Teddlie, C. (2003). Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Eds.) Handbook of mixed methods in social behavioral research (pp. 273–296). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Kirby, S., Berends, M., and Naftel, S. (2001). Implementation in a longitudinal sample of New American Schools: Four years into scale-up. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1413/.Google Scholar

Klein, S., Hamilton, L., McCaffery, D., and Stecher, B. (2000). What do test scores in Texas tell us?Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(41). Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n49/.Google Scholar

Knapp, M. S., Turnbull, B. J., and Shields, P. M. (1990). New directions for educating the children of poverty. Educational Leadership, 48(1), 4–8.Google Scholar

Kochan, S. E., Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (1996, April). You can't judge a high school by test data alone: Constructing an alternative indicator of secondary school effectiveness. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.Google Scholar

Kushman, J., and Yap, K. (1999). What makes the difference in school improvement? An impact study of Onward to Excellence in Mississippi schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 4, 277–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ladd, H. and Hansen, J. (Eds.) (1999). Making money matter: Financing America's schools. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Land, D. (2002). Local school boards under review: Their role and effectiveness in relation to students' academic achievement. CRESPAR technical report 56 Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar

Lareau, A. (1989). Home advantage. New York: Falmer.Google Scholar

Lasky, S. (2001, January). School change, power, moral purpose and teachers' emotions in Ontario. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSEI), Toronto, Ontario.Google Scholar

Lasky, S., and Foster, L. (2003, August). An ecological model for analyzing policy implementation. Paper presented as part of the International Center for Educational Change Seminar Series, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Ontario.Google Scholar

Lee, V. E., and Smith, J. B. (1993). Effects of school restructuring on the achievement and engagement of middle-grade students. Sociology of Education, 66, 164–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levin, H. (1987). New schools for the disadvantaged. Teacher Education Quarterly, 14(4), 60–83.Google Scholar

Levine, D. U., Levine, R. F., and Eubanks, E. E. (1985). Successful implementation of instruction at inner-city schools. Journal of Negro Education, 54 (3), 313–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levine, D. U., and Lezotte, L. W. (1990). Unusually effective schools: A review and analysis of research and practice. Madison, WI: The National Center for Effective Schools Research and Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 330 032).Google Scholar

Lezotte, L. (1989). School improvement based on the effective schools research. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 815–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lezotte, L. W., and Bancroft, B. (1985). Growing use of effective schools model for school improvement. Educational Leadership, 42(3), 23–27.Google Scholar

Lightfoot, S. (1983). Good high schools: Portraits of character and culture. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Lindle, J. (1999). Hasn't anyone else done this right? A field note on the political realities and perceptions in modifying Kentucky's high stakes accountability system. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.

Linn, R., Baker, E., and Betebanner, D. (2002). Accountability systems: Implications of requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Educational Researcher, 31(6), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lipka, J. (1991). Toward a culturally based pedagogy: A case study of one Yup'ik Eskimo teacher. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 22, 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Livingston, D. R., and Livingston, S. M. (2002). Failing Georgia: The case against the ban on social promotion. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(49). Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n49.Google Scholar

Longoria T., Jr. (1998). School politics in Houston: The impact of business involvement. In Stone, C. (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 184–198). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar

Lucas, T., Henze, R., and Donato, R. (1990). Promoting the success of Latino language-minority students: An exploratory study of six high schools. Harvard Educational Review, 60, 315–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lumpkins, B., Parker, F., and Hall, H. (1991). Instructional equity for low achievers in elementary school mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lusi, S. (1997). The role of state departments of education in complex school reform. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Luthar, S. S. (1991). Vulnerability and resilience: A study of high-risk adolescents. Child Development, 62, 600–616.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Iver, Mac M., and Farley, L. (2003). Bringing the district back in: The role of the central office in improving instruction and student achievement (Report No. 65). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar

Madaus, G., and Clarke, M. (2001). The adverse impact of high-stakes testing on minority students: Evidence from one hundred years of test data. In Orfield, G. and Kornhaber, M. (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers: Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education (pp. 85–107). New York: Century Foundation Press.Google Scholar

Madaus, G. F., Kellaghan, T., Rakow, E. A., and King, D. J. (1979). The sensitivity of measures of school effectiveness. Harvard Educational Review, 49, 207–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Madden, N. A., Slavin, R. E., Karweit, N. L., Dolan, L. J., and Wasik, B. A. (1993). Success for All: Longitudinal effects of a restructuring program for inner-city elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malen, B., Croninger, R., and Muncey, D. (2002). Reconstituting schools: “Testing” the “theory of action.”Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marco, G. L. (1974). A comparison of selected school effectiveness measures based on longitudinal data. Journal of Educational Measurement, 11, 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marsh, J. (2002). How districts relate to states, schools, and communities: A review of emerging literature. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal, (pp. 25–41). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., and Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Massell, D. (1998). State strategies for building capacity in education: Progress and continuing challenges (CPRE Research series RR-41). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/rr41.pdf.Google Scholar

Massell, D., and Goertz, M. (2002). District strategies for building instructional capacity. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 43–61). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

May, H., Supovitz, J., and Lesnick, J. (2004). The impact of America's Choice on writing performance in Georgia: First year results.Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved March 30, 2005, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/AC-09.pdf.Google Scholar

McDonald, D., and Keedy, J. (2002). Principals conceptualize the development of teacher leaders: A cross-case study of shared leadership in high-poverty Kentucky schools. In Chrispeels, J. (Ed.), Learning to lead together: The promise and challenge of sharing leadership (pp. 219–255). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

McGregor, J. (1993). Effectiveness of role playing and antiracist teaching in reducing student prejudice. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McHugh, B., and Spath, S. (1997). Carter G. Woodson Elementary School: The success of a private school curriculum in an urban public school. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 2, 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McIntyre, E., and Kyle, D. (2002). Nongraded primary programs: Possibilities for improving practice for teachers. Practitioner Brief No. 4. Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Education. Retrieved, December 1, 2002, from http://crede.ucsc.edu/products/print/pract_briefs/pb4.shtml.

McLaughlin, M., and Talbert, J. (2002). Reforming districts. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 173–193). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

McLaughlin, M. W. (1990). The Rand change agent study revisited: Macro perspectives, micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19, 11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McLaughlin, M. W., and Talbert, J. E. (1993). Contexts that matter for teaching and learning. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching, Stanford University.Google Scholar

McMillan, J. H. (2000). Basic assessment concepts for teachers and administrators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

McNeil, L. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

McNeil, L., and Valenzuela, A. (2001). The harmful impact of the TAAS system of testing in Texas: Beneath the policy rhetoric. In Orfield, G. and Kornhaber, M. (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers: Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education (pp. 127–151). New York: Century Foundation Press.Google Scholar

Mehan, H., Hertweck, A., and Meihls, J. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Menken, K. (2000). Do the models fit? Towards comprehensive school reform for English language learners. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, Center for the Study of Language and Education. Retrieved July 2, 2001, from http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/ncbepubs/tasynthesis/framing/4models.htm.Google Scholar

Merrick, R. M. (1988). Multicultural education: A step toward pluralism. South Bend: Indiana University at South Bend. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 302 451).Google Scholar

Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Mertens, S. (2003). Mixed models and the politics of human research. In Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C., (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 135–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., and Eccles, J. S. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development, 60, 981–992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Minorini, P., and Sugarman, S. (1999). School finance litigation in the name of educational equity: Its evolution, impact and future. In Ladd, H., Chalk, R., and Hansen, J. (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: Issues and perspectives (pp 34–72). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Mintrop, H. (2004). High-stakes accountability, state oversight, and educational equity. Teachers College Record, 106, 2128–2145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moore, H. A. (1988). Effects of gender, ethnicity, and school equity on students' leadership behaviors in a group game. Elementary School Journal, 88, 515–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mortimore, P., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., Lewis, D., and Ecob, R. (1988). School matters: The junior years. Somerset, England: Open Books (Reprint, Paul Chapman: London, 1995).Google Scholar

Murphy, J., and Hallinger, P. (1989). Equity as access to learning: Curricular and instructional treatment differences. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

National Commission on Education. (1995). Success against the odds. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

New American Schools. (1997). Bringing success to scale: Sharing the vision of New American Schools. Arlington, VA: Author.

Newman, F., Smith, B., Allensworth, E., and Bryk, A. (2001). School instructional program coherence: Benefits and challenges. Research report for the Consortium on Chicago School Research. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.consortium-chicago.org/publications/pdfs/p0d02.pdf.Google Scholar

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (1998). Catalog of school reform models: First edition. Portland, OR: Author.

Nye, B. A., Boyd-Zaharias, J., Fulton, B. D., and Wallenhorst, M. P. (1992). Smaller classes really are better. American School Board Journal, 179(5), 31–33.Google Scholar

Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Oakes, J., Quartz, K. H., Ryan, S., and Lipton, M. (2000). Becoming good American schools: The struggle for civic virtue in educational reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Oakes, J., and Wells, A. (1996). Beyond the technicalities of school reform: Lessons from detracking schools. Los Angeles: University of California at Los Angeles, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies.Google Scholar

Oakes, J., Wells, A. S., Jones, M., and Datnow, A. (1997). Detracking: The social construction of ability, cultural politics, and resistance to reform. Teachers College Record, 98, 482–510.Google Scholar

Day, O' J. (2002). Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 293–329. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://gseweb.harvard.edu/∼hepg/oday.html.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Day, O' J., and Gross, B. (1999, April). One system or two? Title I accountability in a context of high stakes for schools in local districts and schools. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar

O'Day, J. A., and Smith, M. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. In Fuhrman, S. (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 250–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Odden, A. (1999). Improving state school finance systems: New realities create need to re-engineer school finance structures (Occasional paper series). Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/op-04.pdf.Google Scholar

Odden, A., and Clune, W. (1998). School finance systems: Aging structures in need of repair. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20, 157–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Padron, Y., Waxman, H., and Rivera, H. (2002). Issues in educating Hispanic students. In Stringfield, S. and Land, D. (Eds.), Educating at-risk students (pp. 66–89). Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar

Pate, G. S. (1981). Research on prejudice reduction. Educational Leadership, 38, 288–291.Google Scholar

Pate, G. S. (1988). Research on reducing prejudice. Social Education, 52, 287–289.Google Scholar

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research and evaluation research methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Pine, G. J., and Hilliard, A. G. (1990). Rx for racism: Imperatives for America's schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 593–600.Google Scholar

Placier, M., Hall, P., McKendall, S. B., and Cockrell, K. (2000). Policy as transformation of intentions: Making multicultural education policy. Educational Policy, 14(2), 259–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Porter, A., and Chester, M. (2001). Building a high-quality assessment and accountability program: The Philadelphia example. Paper presented at a Brookings Institution Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

President's Task Force on Education. (1964). Report of the President's Task Force on Education. Unpublished report. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C.

Ralph, J. H. and Fennessey, J. (1983). Science or reform: Some questions about the effective schools model. Phi Delta Kappan, 64, 692.Google ScholarPubMed

Regional Educational Laboratory Network. (2000). Implementing education reform: Strategies used by states, districts, and schools. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.

Resnick, L., and Glennan, T. (2002). Leadership for learning: A theory of action for urban school districts. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 160–173). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

Resnick, L., and Harwell, M. (2000, June). Instructional variation and student achievement in a standards-based education district. (CSE Technical Report 522). Los Angeles: University of California, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Center for the Study of Evaluation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reyes, M. D. (1992). Challenging venerable assumptions: Literacy instruction for linguistically different students. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 427–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reynolds, D. (1976). The delinquent school. In Woods, P. (Ed.), The process of schooling. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Reynolds, D., Creemers, B., Stringfield, S., Teddlie, C., and Schaffer, E. (2002). World class schools: International perspectives on school effectiveness. London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar

Reynolds, D., and Teddlie, C. (2000). The future agenda for school effectiveness research. In Teddlie, C. and Reynolds, D. (Eds.), The international handbook of school effectiveness research (pp. 322–343). London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Reynolds, D., Teddlie, C., Creemers, B., Scheerens, J., and Townsend, T. (2000). An introduction to school effectiveness research. In Teddlie, C. and Reynolds, D. (Eds.), The international handbook of school effectiveness research (pp. 3–25). London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Rich, W. (1996). Black mayors and school politics: The failure of reform in Detroit, Gary and Newark. New York: Garland.Google Scholar

Rich, Y. (1987). The potential contribution of school counseling to school integration. Journal of Counseling and Development, 65, 495–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Richardson, V. (Ed.). (2002). Handbook of research on teaching. (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar

Robinson, G. E. (1990). Synthesis of research on the effects of class size. Educational Leadership, 47(7), 80–90.Google Scholar

Rogers, M., Miller, N., and Hennigan, K. (1981). Cooperative games as an intervention to promote cross-racial acceptance. American Educational Research Journal, 18, 513–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosenshine, B. (1983). Teaching functions in instructional programs. Elementary School Journal, 83, 335–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ross, S. M., Alberg, M., and Nunnery, J. (1999). Selection and evaluation of locally developed versus externally developed schoolwide programs. In Orfield, G. and Debray, E. H. (Eds.), Hard work for good schools: Facts not fads in Title I reform (pp. 147–158). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Civil Rights Project.Google Scholar

Rowan, B. (1984). Shamanistic rituals in effective schools. Issues in Education, 2, 76–87.Google Scholar

Rowan, B. (2001, March). The ecology of school improvement: Notes on the school improvement industry in the U.S. Paper presented at the conference on Social Geographies of Educational Change, Barcelona, Spain.

Rowan, B., Bossert, S. T., and Dwyer, D. C. (1983). Research on effective schools: A cautionary note. Educational Researcher, 12(4), 24–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rudo, Z. (2001). Corrective action in low-performing schools and school districts. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Developmental Laboratory.Google Scholar

Ruiz-Primo, M., Li, M., and Shavelson, R. (2002). Looking into students' science notebooks: What do teachers do with them? CSE Technical Report. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Rumberger, R. W., and Douglas, W. J. (1992). The impact of racial and ethnic segregation on the achievement gap in California high schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 377–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Russon, C., Horn, J., and Oliver, S. (2000). Gila River indicant community (Arizona) and its role as a partner in the NSF-supported UCAN Rural Systemic Initiative (RSI). Prepared for the NSF Rural Systemic Initiatives Evaluation Study, The Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo. Retrieved September 15, 2002, from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/rsi/gila_river.htm.Google Scholar

Rutter, M. (1983). School effects on pupil progress: Research findings and policy implications. In Shulman, L. and Sykes, G. (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 3–41). New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., and Ouston, J., with Smith, A. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children. London: Open Books and Boston: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Saldate, M. IV, Mishra, S. P., and Medina, M. Jr. (1985). Bilingual instruction and academic achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Instructional Psychology 12, 24–30.Google Scholar

Sammons, P., Hillman, J., and Mortimore, P. (1995). Key characteristics of effective schools: A review of school effectiveness research. London: International School Effectiveness and Improvement Centre, University of London.Google Scholar

Sammons, P., Mortimore, P., and Thomas, S. (1993, September). Do schools perform consistently across outcomes and areas? Paper presented at annual conference of the British Educational Research Association, Oxford.Google Scholar

Sarason, S. (1997). Revisiting the creation of settings. Mind Culture and Activity, 4, 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Scheerens, J. (1992). Effective schooling: Research, theory and practice. London: Cassell.Google Scholar

Scheerens, J., and Bosker, R. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Schmidt, M., and Datnow, A. (2002, April). How teachers make sense of comprehensive school reform within their state policy contexts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for general causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Shavelson, R., Baxter, G., and Pine, J. (1992). Performance assessments: Political rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, 21(4), 22–27.Google Scholar

Sizer, T. R. (1984). Horace's compromise. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E. (1985). Cooperative learning: Applying contact theory in desegregated schools. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 43–62.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E. (1987). Grouping for instruction: Equity and effectiveness. Equity and Excellence, 23, 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slavin, R. E. (1988). Synthesis of research on grouping in elementary and secondary schools. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 67–77.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60, 471–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slavin, R. E. (1994). Quality, appropriateness, incentive, and time: A model of instructional effectiveness. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slavin, R. E. (1998, Fall). Far and wide: Developing and disseminating research-based programs. American Educator. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.aft.org/edissues/rsa/guide/change/slavin.htm.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., and Fashola, O. (1998). Show me the evidenceThousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., Karweit, N., and Madden, N. A. (Eds.). (1989). Effective programs for students at risk. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., Karweit, N., and Wasik, B. (1994). Preventing early school failure. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., Leavey, M., and Madden, N. A. (1982). Effects of student teams and individualized instruction on student mathematics achievement. Attitudes and behaviors. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., and Madden, N. A. (1989). What works for students at risk: A research synthesis. Educational Leadership, 46(5), 4–13.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E ., and Madden, N. A . (1998). Scaling up: Lessons learned in the dissemination of Success for All. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E., and Madden, N. A. (1999). Effects of bilingual and English as a Second Language adaptations of Success for All on the reading achievement of students acquiring English. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University and Success for All Foundation. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.successforall.net/resource/research/bilingualesl.htm.Google Scholar

Slavin, R. E, Madden, N., Dolan, L., and Wasik, B. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for All. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar

Smith, L., Ross, S., McNelis, M., Squires, M., Wasson, R., Maxwell, S., Weddle, K., Nath, L., Grehan, A., and Buggey, T. (1998). The Memphis Restructuring Initiative: Analysis of activities and outcomes that affect implementation success. Education and Urban Society, 30, 296–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smylie, M., and Wenzel, S. (2003). The Chicago Annenberg Challenge: Successes, failures, and lessons for the future. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved June 10, 2003, from http://www.consortium-chicago.org/publications/p62.html.Google Scholar

Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., and Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools.Google Scholar

Snyder, J. (2002). New Haven Unified School District: A teaching quality system for excellence and equity. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 94–111). New York: Teachers College.Google Scholar

Solano-Flores, G., and Trumbull, E. (2003). Examining language in context: The need for new research and practice paradigms in the testing of English-language Learners. Educational Researcher, 32, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spillane, J. (1996). School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy, 10, 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spillane, J. (1999). State and local government relations in the era of standards-based reform: Standards, state policy instruments, and the local instructional policy making. Educational Policy, 13, 546–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spillane, J . (2000). District leaders' perceptions of teacher learning (CPRE Occasional Paper Series OP-05). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/op-05.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Spillane, J. (2001). Challenging instruction for “all students”: Policy, practitioners, and practice. In Fuhrman, S. (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the United States (pp. 217–242). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Spillane, J., and Jennings, N. (1997). Aligned instructional policy and ambitious pedagogy: Exploring instructional reform from the classroom perspective. Teachers College Record, 98, 449–481.Google Scholar

Stein, M., and D'Amico, L. (2002). District as professional learning community. In Hightower, A., Knapp, M., Marsh, J., and McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal: Opening the conversation (pp. 61–76). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Stein, M. K., Hubbard, L., and Mehan, H. (2002, April). Reform ideas that travel far afield: The two cultures of reform in New York City's District #2 and San Diego. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Stein, M. K., Leinhardt, G., and Bickel, W. (1989). Instructional issues for teaching students at risk. In Slavin, R. E., Karweit, N. L., and Madden, N. A. (Eds.), Effective programs for students at risk (pp. 145–194). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Stone, C. (1998a). Civic capacity and urban school reform. In Stone, C. (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 250–277). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar

Stone, C. (1998b). Introduction: Urban education in political context. In Stone, (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 1–23). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar

Stone, C., Henig, J., Jones, B., and Pierannuzi, C. (2001). Building civic capacity: The politics of reforming urban schools. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar

Stringfield, S. (1999). The phoenix rises from its ashes … doesn't it? In Freiberg, J. (Ed.), School climate: Measuring, improving and sustaining healthy learning environments (pp. 186–207). London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Stringfield, S. (2000). A synthesis and critique of four recent reviews of whole school reform in the United States. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11, 259–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stringfield, S., and Datnow, A. (2002). Systemic support for schools serving students placed at risk. In Stringfield, S. and Land, D. (Eds.), Educating at-risk students (pp. 269–288). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.Google Scholar

Stringfield, S., Datnow, A., Borman, G., and Rachuba, L. (1999). National evaluation of Core Knowledge Sequence implementation: Final report. Baltimore: Center for Social Organization of Schools, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar

Stringfield, S., Datnow, A., Ross, S. M., and Snively, F. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring in multicultural, multilingual contexts: Early observations from Sunland County. Education and Urban Society, 30, 326–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stringfield, S., Millsap, M. A., Herman, R., Yoder, N., Brigham, N., Nesselrodt, P., Schaffer, E., Karweit, N., Levin, M., and Stevens, R. (with Gamse, B., Puma, M., Rosenblum, S., Beaumont, J., Randall, B., and Smith, L.). (1997). Urban and suburban/rural special strategies for educating disadvantaged children. Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar

Stringfield, S., and Ross, S. (1997). A “reflection” at mile three of a marathon: The Memphis Restructuring Initiative in mid-stride. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8, 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stringfield, S., and Teddlie, C. (1991). School, classroom, and student level indicators of rural school effectiveness. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 7(3), 15–28.Google Scholar

Stringfield, S., Teddlie, C., and Suarez, S. (1985). Classroom interaction in effective and ineffective schools: Preliminary results from phase III of the Louisiana School Effectiveness Study. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 20(2), 31–37.Google Scholar

Supovitz, J. A., and Turner, H. (2000). The influence of standards-based reform on classroom practices and culture. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 37, 963–980.3.0.CO;2-0>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Supovitz, J., and Weathers, J. (2004). Dashboard lights: Monitoring implementation of district institutional reform strategies. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved March 30, 2005, from http://www.cpre.org/Publications/pdf/snapshotstudy.pdf.Google Scholar

Swisher, K. (1990). Cooperative learning and the education of American Indian/Alaskan Native students: A review of the literature and suggestions for implementation. Journal of American Indian Education, 29, 36–43.Google Scholar

Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining the qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Tashakkori, A ., and Teddlie, C . (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Taylor, B. O. (Ed.). (1990). Case studies in effective schools research. Madison, WI: National Center for Effective Schools Research and Development.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C. (1994). Integrating classroom and school data in school effectiveness research. In Reynolds, D. et al. (Eds.), Advances in school effectiveness research and practice (pp. 111–132). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C. (2003). The KEYS case study in Mississippi: A failed “graft” of one school reform onto another. In Portin, B., Beck, L., Knapp, M., and Murphy, J. (Eds.), Self reflective renewal in schools: Local lessons from a national initiative (pp. 129–146). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., Kirby, P., and Stringfield, S. (1989). Effective versus ineffective schools: Observable differences in the classroom. American Journal of Education, 97, 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Teddlie, C., Kochan, S., and Taylor, D. (2002). The ABC+ model for school diagnosis, feedback, and improvement. In Visscher, A. J. and Coe, R. (Eds.), School improvement through performance feedback (pp. 75–114). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., Lang, M. H., and Oescher, J. (1995). The masking of the delivery of educational services to lower achieving students. Urban Education, 30, 125–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Teddlie, C., and Meza, J. (1999). Using informal and formal measures to create classroom profiles. In Freiberg, J. (Ed.), School climate: Measuring, improving and sustaining healthy learning environments (pp. 48–64). London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., and Reynolds, D. (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., and Reynolds, D. (2001). Countering the critics: Responses to recent criticisms of school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12, 41–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Teddlie, C., and Stringfield, S. (1985). A differential analysis of effectiveness in middle and lower socio-economic status schools. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 20(2), 38–44.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., and Stringfield, S. (1993). Schools make a difference: Lessons learned from a 10-year study of school effects. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar

Teddlie, C., Stringfield, S., and Reynolds, D. (2000). Context issues within school effectiveness research. In Teddlie, C. and Reynolds, D. (Eds.), The international handbook of school effectiveness research (pp. 160–185). London: Falmer.Google Scholar

Tharp, R. G., Estrada, P., Dalton, S. S., and Yamauchi, L. A. (2000). Teaching transformed: Achieving excellence, fairness, inclusion and harmony. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar

Tharp, R. G., Lewis, H., Hilberg, R., Bird, C., Epaloose, G., Dalton, S. S., Youpa, D. G., Rivera, H., In-Feathers, Riding M., and Eriacho, W. (1999). Seven more mountains and a map: Overcoming obstacles to reform in Native American schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 4(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tikunoff, W. J. (1985). Applying significant bilingual instructional features in the classroom. Bilingual Education Research Series. Rosslyn, VA: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 338 106).Google Scholar

Togneri, W., and Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. Washington, DC: Learning First Alliance and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

U.S. Department of Education. (1999). CSRD in the field: Fall 1999 update. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Guidance on the Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Program. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/compreform/guidance/guidance2002.pdf.

Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. American-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar

Valverde, L. A. (1988). Principals creating better schools in minority communities. Education and Urban Society, 20, 319–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Venezky, R. L., and Winfield, L. F. (1979). Schools that succeed beyond expectations in teaching reading (Tech. Rep. No. 1). Newark: University of Delaware, Studies in Education.Google Scholar

Virgilio, I., Teddlie, C., and Oescher, J. (1991). Variance and context differences in teaching at differentially effective schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2, 152–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Walberg, H. J., and Genova, W. J. (1983). School practices and climates that promote integration. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wang, M., Haertel, G., and Walberg, H. (1997). What do we know. Philadelphia: Temple University, Laboratory for Student Success.Google Scholar

Warring, D., Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., and Johnson, R. (1985). Impact of different types of cooperative learning on cross-ethnic and cross-sex relationships. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Watson, N., Fullan, M., and Kilchner, A. (2002, April). The role of the district: Professional learning and district reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar

Waxman, H., Wang, M. C., Anderson, K. A., and Walberg, H. J. (1985). Synthesis of research on the effects of adaptive education. Educational Leadership, 43(1), 26–29.Google Scholar

Weber, G. (1971). Inner city children can be taught to read: Four successful schools. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.Google Scholar

Wenzel, S. A., Smylie, M. A., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Gutierrez, T., Hallman, S., Luppescu, S., and Miller, S. R. (2001). Development of the Chicago Annenberg Schools: 1996–1999 (Research report for the Consortium on Chicago School Research). Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved February 23, 2004, from http://www.consortium-chicago.org/publications/pdfs/p0b05.pdf.Google Scholar

Wilde, J., Thompson, B., and Herrera, R. M. (1999). Guide: Comprehensive school reform models addressing the needs of English language learners. Retrieved January 15, 2000, from: http:www.cesdp.nmhu.edu/CSRD-Guide/backgrnd.htm.

Wimpelberg, R., Teddlie, C., and Stringfield, S. (1989). Sensitivity to context: The past and future of effective schools research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 25(1), 82–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yakimowski, M. (2004). No Child Left Behind: A focus on accountability. Baltimore: Baltimore City Public Schools System.Google Scholar

Yonezawa, S., and Datnow, A. (1999). Supporting multiple reform designs in a culturally and linguistically diverse school district. Journal of Education of Students Placed At Risk, 4, 101–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yonezawa, S., and Stringfield, S. (2000). Special Strategies for Educating Disadvantaged Students follow-up study: Examining the sustainability of research based school reforms. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk.Google Scholar