Search

Although only a few dozen school systems have formally embraced site-based management, thousands of districts across the country are experimenting with it in some form. The study described in this report attempts to distill the experience of pioneering school systems, so that citizens and educators in other localities can benefit from it. During the 1989-90 and 1990-91 school years, a RAND research team studied five major urban and suburban school systems that had adopted site-based management: Columbus, Ohio; Dade County, Florida; Edmonton, Alberta (Canada); Jefferson County (Louisville), Kentucky; and Prince William County, Virginia. Newspaper and scholarly accounts of site-based management in other communities were also considered. The report draws five major conclusions: (1) though site-based management focuses on individual schools, it is really a reform of the entire school system; (2) site-based management will lead to real changes at the school level only if it is a school system's basic reform strategy; (3) site-based schools are likely to evolve over time and to develop distinctive characters, goals, and operating styles; (4) a system of distinctive, site-based schools requires a rethinking of accountability; and (5) the ultimate accountability mechanism for a system of distinctive site-based schools is parental choice. These findings have specific implications for the entire school community. An appendix provides an overview of the five districts studied. (MLH)

This study compares zoned high schools, special public magnet schools, and Catholic high schools to identify features that motivate low-income students. Ten days of observations, interviews, and reviews of student records were conducted at eight New York City schools. Of the eight, three were Catholic high schools, two were zoned high schools, and three were special public magnet schools. Less intensive observations were conducted at three schools in Washington (District of Columbia) and two additional schools in New York City. Important similarities were found between the Catholic schools and the special-purpose magnet schools. These schools are referred to as "focus" schools. Focus schools have higher graduation rates than zoned schools, and disadvantaged graduates of focus schools perform better on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) than disadvantaged graduates of zoned schools. The following key features of focus schools could be reproduced in public schools to the benefit of low-income students: (1) concentration on student outcomes before all other matters; (2) strong social contracts that communicate the responsibilities of administration, students, and teachers and establish the benefits that each group receives; (3) strong commitment to parenting and molding student attitudes and values; (4) centripetal curricula that draw all students, regardless of ability and preference, toward learning core skills and perspectives; (5) flexibility to change programs to meet emerging needs; (6) staff recruitment and orientation that protect and sustain staff's distinctive character; and (7) accountability to parents, students, neighborhood and parish groups, and financial supporters. Statistical data are presented in seven tables. A 66-item bibliography is appended. (FMW)