This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by St. John, E. P. Articles by Michael, R. S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Assessing the Rationales for Educational Reforms: An Examination of Policy Claims About Professional Development, Comprehensive Reform, and Direct Instruction

Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education at the University of Michigan

Genevieve Manset-Williamson

School of Education at Indiana University

Choong-Geun Chung

Smith Research Center at Indiana University

Robert S. Michael

Center for Evaluation and Education Policy at Indiana University

Evaluation studies seldom examine whether the rationales used to argue for an educational reform actually hold up when empirical evidence is examined after the reform has been implemented. This article examines survey data from 3 years of analyses of early reading interventions to examine three rationales that were used to argue for the program. First, there was evidence to support the argument that teachers need time to collaborate about improving educational outcomes. This study found that 2 years of funding for early reading reforms provided a margin of difference for collaborative efforts among teachers to promote reading-related outcomes. Second, the argument that comprehensive reform strategies promote gains in student outcomes was also supported, but not all reform models had their intended effects. Finally, there was no evidence from this study that the direct/explicit approach to reading instruction improved student outcomes, although this claim merits more systematic study in the future.

Key Words: comprehensive school reform • state policy • reading programs • evaluation

Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 3, 480-519 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0013161X04269618


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?