Student Views of Learning in Northwest Regional Educational La

217 Pages·2012·2.17 MB·English

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 404 752
EA 028 257
AUTHOR
Kushman, James W., Ed.
TITLE
Look Who's Talking Now: Student Views of Learning in
Restructuring Schools.
INSTITUTION
Northwest Regional Educational Lab., Portland, OR.
School Improvement Program.
SPONS AGENCY
Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),
Washington, DC.
PUB DATE
Feb 97
NOTE
222p.
AVAILABLE FROM
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 101 SW
Main Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97204
($14.75).
PUB TYPE
Reports
Research/Technical (143)
Tests /Evaluation Instruments (160)
EDRS PRICE
MF01/PC09 Plus Postage.
DESCRIPTORS
Action Research; Data Analysis;
Data Collection;
Elementary Secondary Education; *Learning Motivation;
*Learning Strategies; *School Restructuring; *Student
Attitudes; Student Needs
ABSTRACT
Since 1988, a team composed of staff from 10
educational regional laboratories, teachers, administrators, and
students have worked to become a learning community. This report
describes the development and activities of the restructuring
collaborative that gathered information on students and learning.
Chapters 2 through 8 present case studies from an elementary school,
three high schools, a network of reforming schools, a group of
reform-minded teachers, and a survey of Kentucky students. The case
studies represent the views of over 1,000 students from diverse
communities and schools on school restructuring. Methods included
interviews, small focus groups, surveys, and observation. Chapter 9
discusses common themes that emerged from the case-study data:
(1)
Students are keen observers of how people relate to each other within
the school walls;
(2) a variety of learning styles exists, which
necessitates providing a variety of learning activities; and (3)
students continue to view success in school in very traditional
terms. Chapter 10 discusses how schools can systematically gather
information from students in a short time, outlining three
"data-in-a-day" strategies for gathering, collecting, and analyzing
data. Twenty tables are included. Appendices include copies of the
interview guides, the survey instrument, and contact information.
(LMI)
***********************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
***********************************************************************
I
Aill11
Student Views of Learning in
Restructuring Schools
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Of lice of Educational Research and Improvement
CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
iiE
CENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in this
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy.
REGIONAL EDUCATIONAL
LABORATORY NETWORK
by the Restructuring Collaborative
AVAILABLE
BEST COPY
2
Look Who's Talking Now:
Student Views of Learning in Restructuring Schools
Edited by
James W. Kushman
Work Conducted by
Restructuring Collaborative'
c/o School Improvement Program
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
101 SW Main Street, Suite 500
Portland, OR 97204
[phone]
February 1997
The Restructuring Collaborative is a national network of staff from regional educational laboratories
and educators and students from throughout the US. The purpose of the collaborative is to increase the
knowledge of educators and laboratory staff about the processes and results of restructuring efforts in K-12
school systems throughout the country. The work of the collaborative and preparation of this manuscript
were supported by funds from the US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and
Improvement (OERI). The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the position of OERI and no
official endorsement should be inferred.
3
Acknowledgments
This work was indeed a collaborative effort involving not only the authors, but
many other people from regional laboratories, schools across the country, and other
agencies. From the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, special thanks is due to
Tony Kneidek who served as technical editor, Linda Gipe who helped with final edits, and
Jerry Kirkpatrick who helped bring together this LNP publication.
The authors wish to thank many people from regional laboratories and other
educational agencies who assisted in data collection, manuscript review, or otherwise
provided inspiration and support for this project. Special thanks is due to the following
individuals and groups:
Catherine Awsumb, Research for Better Schools
Wade Brylnelson, California Department of Education
Kathy Busick, Pacific Region Educational Laboratory
John Buttram, Collaborative on School Change
Pamela Cole, Appalachia Educational Laboratory
Susan Everson, Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory
Margaret Fortune, California Department of Education
Nancy Fuentes, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory
Ruth Hinson, Louisiana Alliance for Education Reform
Kentucky State Caucus, Appalachia Educational Laboratory Board of Directors
Rhonda Mordecai-Phillips, Research for Better Schools
Karen Simon, Appalachia Educational Laboratory
Richard Tompkins, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory
Jaci Webb-Dempsey, Research for Better Schools
John Williams, Appalachia Eductaional Laboratory
Most importantly, this project depended on the involvement and cooperation of
school personnel and students throughout the United States. We thank you all! We
would like to give special thanks to the following individuals, who are listed alphabetically
without organizational affiliation in order to protect the confidentiality of case study
schools:
4
Carolyn Boudreaux
Maryann Overland
Angela Rattler
Sue Brown
Cynthia Rattler
Suzanne Cusick
Kirsh Reinhardt
Murtis Dennis
Tia Robertson
Sheri Funderburk
Belia Rodriguez
Deborah Gallagher
Esteban Garcia
Linda Swindle
Meitter Gibbs
Adriane Tullier
Roberto Loredo
Austin Whipple
Cheryl Montagnino
In addition to these individuals, we would also like to thank the following study
participants:
Students, staff, parents, and community members of schools participating in the Every
Student Succeeds initiative in California
Teachers and principals from the Northeast Assessment Working Party
Students, teachers and principals of Kentucky schools
5
Contents
Page
Acknowledgments
Contents
iii
List of Tables
vi
Chapter 1. Learning What Students Think About School Restructuring
1
Robert E. Blum, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
Becoming A Learning Community
1
Purpose and Organization of the Book
13
Chapter 2. Children's Voices From the Rainbow School
17
Shirley M. Hord & Harvetta M. Robertson, Southwest Educational
Development Laboratory
Setting the Stage
17
Working With Students
21
What We Learned From Students
22
What Happened With Student Data
27
References
27
Chapter 3. Research in the Hands of Students
29
Joan Shaughnessy & James W. Kushman, Northwest Regional Educational
Laboratory
Setting the Stage
29
Working With Students
33
What We Learned From Students
34
What Happened With Student Data
38
Chapter 4. Speaking with High School Students in the Southwest
41
Shirley M Hord, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory
Setting the Stage
41
Working With Students
45
What We Learned From Students
45
What Happened With Student Data
57
;ti
Chapter 5. Middle School Reform from the Students' Perspective
59
Bruce Wilson & Dick Corbett, Research for Better Schools
59
Setting the Stage
Adult Interviews
61
65
Student Interviews
68
Student Interviews and Observations
Student Open-Ended Surveys
71
What Happened With Student Data
84
84
Summary
Chapter 6. What Students Think of Restructuring: Student Views of
87
Systemic Reform in California
JoAnn Izu, Far West Laboratory
87
Setting the Stage
Working With Students
95
What We Learned From Students: Common Experiences and Perspectives
96
of Students
99
What We Learned About Capturing Student Voices
What Happened With Student Data
103
Chapter 7. Northeast Educators Inquire: What Do Students Think About
105
Learners and Learning'?
Pat L. Cox & Jill Mirman Owen, Northeast and Islands Regional Laboratory
105
Setting the Stage
Working With Students: The Research Effort in the First Year
119
What We Learned From Students: First Year
111
What Happened With Student Data: First Year
115
Working With Students: The Research Effort in the Second Year
115
What We Learned From Students: Second Year
117
What Happened With Student Data: Second Year
118
120
What We Learned Overall
122
References
Chapter 8. What Students Think About Kentucky Reform
125
Sandra R. Orletsky & Gregory Leopold, Appalachia Educational Laboratory
Setting the Stage
125
128
Working With Students
129
What We Learned From Students
What Happened With Student Data
135
iv
Chapter 9. Common Themes and Learnings From the Case Studies
141
James W. Kushman, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
What We Learned From the Student Data
141
What We Learned About the Process of Asking Students What They Think
149
References
161
Chapter 10. Finding Out What Students Think: One-Day Methods Schools
Can Use
163
The Restructuring Collaborative
Planning and Preparation
164
Focusing and Designing the Research
166
Collecting Data
170
Analyzing Data
172
Developing Feedback
173
Using Student Data for School Improvement
175
Appendix A. Interview Protocol Used in Dickinson Elementary School
179
Appendix B. Survey Instrument Used in Eastern Middle School
197
Appendix C. Interview Guide Used in California Schools
211
Appendix D. Contact Information for Authors
215
List of Tables
Page
Chapter 4
4.1: Student Success in School
48
4.2: Student Success Out of School
49
4.3: How Students Learn Best
51
4.4: What Are Your Teachers Doing to Help You Learn?
53
4.5: What Do You Wish Your Teachers Were Doing to Help You Learn?
54
Chapter 5
5.1: Student Views of Success
73
5.2: Student Views of Classroom Activities
75
5.3: Student Quotes Comparing Low and High Internal Locus of Control
79
5.4: Percent of Internal Control
79
5.5: Student Responses Comparing High and Low Matches on Helpful
Activities and Usual Activities in the Classroom
81
5.6: Percent of Students With Matching Needs and Experiences
83
Chapter 6
6.1: Demographic Breakdown (1993-94 school year)
90
6.2: Major Restructuring Strategies Implemented in Ten Schools (as of
92
Spring 1994)
Chapter 7
7.1: The Number and Type of Schools Participating in the Student Inquiry
Effort
110
7.2: Student Responses to the Question: Do You Consider Yourself a
Successful Learner? In School? Out of School?
112
Chapter 8
8.1: Principal Views of AEL Report
136
8.2: Policymakers Views of AEL Report
137
8.3: State Department Views of AEL Report
138
8.4: State Legislators Views of AEL Report
138
8.5: AEL Board Member Views of AEL Report
139
9
vi
Chapter 1
Learning What Students Think About School Restructuring
Robert E. Blum
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
Becoming A Learning Community
So you want to know what students think? A group of us
staff from regional
laboratories, teachers, administrators, students and, in a small way, university professors
have been learning how to find out. Over a six-year period, we have
and parents
become a collaborative, a team of people spread across the country working to bring
students and their voice into school restructuring efforts. Students, teachers,
administrators, and regional laboratory staff have all been involved at various times and in
various ways.
what they
This book, a product of the collaborative, has a focus on students
think and how they can become leaders and participants in school reform. The book also
tells the story of how the collaborative evolved, including what we did and what we
learned. It is a rich source of information for anyone interested in bringing students into
their school improvement processes, or wanting to know what students think, or wanting
to learn how to collaborate.
The story began with staff from each of ten regional educational laboratories
coming together to clarify thinking about school restructuring, a hot topic in the fall of
1988. Two-and-a-half years later, the first student appeared in the group. When this
student started to work at our sides, we began to see our own work from a new
perspective. We came from two different worlds, but we learned from one another, and
our joint work was richer. This first direct involvement of a student in collaborative
planning was a turning point for us. Here is how that experience is remembered, first from
a student's perspective, and then from the viewpoint of a regional laboratory staff
10
I