DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 404 094 RC 020 936

TITLE Organizing for Schooling. IDRA Focus.

INSTITUTION Intercultural Development Research Association, San

Antonio, Tex.

REPORT NO ISSN-1069-5672PUB DATE Jan 97

NOTE 21p.

PUB TYPE Collected Works Serials (022)

JOURNAL CIT IDRA Newsletter; v24 n1 Jan 1997

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS Bilingual Education; Childrens Rights; Disadvantaged;*Educational Change; *Educational Improvement;Educational Planning; Educational Policy; EducationalPractices; Educational Research; Elementary SecondaryEducation; *Equal Education; Federal Aid; *LimitedEnglish Speaking; Professional Development; *School

Activities; *School Effectiveness

ABSTRACTThis theme issue includes four articles on schoolwide

approaches to educational equity and improvement. "Schoolwide

Projects: A Challenge for Administrators on Campuses with LEP

Students" (Abelardo Villarreal) synthesizes the literature on

schoolwide reform strategies used in schools that have been

successful with limited-English-proficient (LEP) students. Four

indicators central to these schools' effectiveness with LEP students

are rigorous standards; flexible, high quality curriculum;coordinated federal resources; and goals and results orientation. "A

Different Kind of Will: Educational Equity and the School Reform

Movement" (Bradley Scott) reviews research findings about four types

of school practices that discriminate against disadvantaged students,

examines policy options to eliminate barriers and assure educational

equity, discusses elements of the Improving America's Schools Act of

1994 and Goals 2000: Educate America Act that promote equitable

outcomes, and lists questions to use in assessing program equity.

"IDRA's Project FLAIR: Professional Development Model Addresses

Literacy Development from a Schoolwide Perspective" (Rogelio Lopez

del Bosque) describes Project FLAIR (Focusing on Language and

Academic Instructional Renewal), which provides professional

development training and other support for school-based development

of an intensive schoolwide language-across-the-curriculum program.

"The Whole School, the Whole Child" is an interview with Elfida

Gutierrez, principal of Hueco Elementary School (El Paso, Texas), who

discusses schoolwide improvement in classroom practices and

assessment. Contains references. This issue also contains the

cumulative index for the IDRA Newsletter for January 1996-December

1996. (SV)

***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.***********************************************************************

61;

iQ)cif Ns

iS

DE Vp24

ad"

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

IDRA Newsletter

Inside this Issue:

Schoolwide programs and equity

4 A model for literacy development

* A principal talks about her program

* New book on school finance reform

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDyCATIONALRESOURCESINFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it

1 0 Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction oublity.

Points of view or opinions stated m the docu-ment do not necessarily represent °(f eta'OE RI position or witty.

r,.

IDRA Focus:ORGANIZING FOR SCHOOLING

/SSA' /069-5671 Volume XXIV. No. I January 1997

SCHOOL WIDE PROJECTS: A CHALLENGE FOR

ADMINISTRATORS ON CAMPUSES WITH LEP STUDENTS

'tr t I I ' I

On a healthy body, a simple band-aidwill help the healing of a wound. But anunhealthy body runs a higher risk ofcomplications such as an infection, so asimple band-aid will not do the job. Morehas to be done.

Organizations basically operate on thesame premise. Schools are no exception.Some schools are, for the most part. effectivein meeting the needs of a diverse studentpopulation. Any need that may surface willbe minor and can be addressed through ashort-term measure.

There are other situations where aseement of the student population is notachieving as well as other students. These'students are being neglected. They do nothave equal access to appropriate educationalopportunities.

A schoolwide approach providesschools the opportunity to address studentneeds more holistically. D. August, et al.,define the philosophy behind schoolwideprograms: "When a large proportion ofstudents in a school are in need. the best wayto upgrade the educational experience forthose students is to improve the program forthe entire student body" (1995).

Furthermore, the philosophy is basedon the premise that specific needs ofeconomically disadvantaged students andstudents from diverse cultural backgroundsare symptomatic of many school variablesthat are not functioning in productive waysor in concert for the benefit of all studentpopulations. Schoolwide programs allowfor careful and comprehensive planning sothat the impact of variables and factors canbe better understood and addressed to benefitall students.

R COPY AVAILABLE 2

PurposeBilingual education proponents and

many parents of limited - English - proficient( LEP) children perceive two statements fromfederal documents as creating someambiguity as to how federal funding can beused. The Bilingual Education Act, forexample, is very focused on its intent andpurpose. Recent statements on the use ofvarious federal program funds forschoolwide programs, though, communicatea sense of extreme flexibility. They alsostate that a school may "use funds receivedunder Subpart 1 of the Bilingual EducationAct to support its schoolwide programprovided that it improves instruction andother services for limited - English- proficientchildren in school" (Federal Register. 1995).This second statement may be interpretedsuperficially to mean that schools can usethe funds in any area even when justificationfrom an instructional dimension is unclear.

For example, the possibility of abusein the use of federal funds destined to meetthe needs of LEP students becomes a realconcern when funds are used to attendleadership conferences and this activity isnot part ofthe school's improvement plan toraise achievement levels of LEP students.This paradox has caused anguish and concernamong many bilingual educators because ofthe lack of specific guidelines to ensure thatfunds earmarked for LEP children producethe impact expected in the leuislation.

The concern is justified and becomeseven more disturbing when we witnessadministrators who talk about schoolwideprojects and say things like, "Now we canuse federal funds for anything we want" and

Schoolwide Projects - continued on page 2

IN THIS ISSUE

14

A DIFFERENT KIND OF WILL:

EDUCATIONAL EQUITY

IDRA's PROJECT FLAIR:PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

REFLECTIONS & COMMENTARY

NEWSLETTER EDITORIAL PAGE

IDRA's NEW PUBLICATION

AND ORDER FORM

The Intercultural Development Re-search Association (IDRA) is a non-profitorganization with a 501(c)(3) tax exemptstatus. The purpose of the organization isto disseminate information concerningequality of educational opportunity. TheIDRA Newsletter (ISSN 1069-5672, copy-right ©1997) serves as a vehicle for com-munication with educators, school boardmembers, decision-makers, parents, andthe general public concerning the educa-tional needs of all children in Texas andacross the United States.

Publicatioh office:5835 Callaghan Road, Suite 350San Antonio, Texas 78228-1190210/684-8180; Fax 210/684-5389

IDRA World Wide Web site:http://www.idra.org

IDRA E-mail Address:idra@idra.org

Maria Robledo Montecel, Ph.D.IDRA Executive Director

Newsletter Executive Editor

Christie L. Goodman, APRIDRA Communications Manager

Newsletter Production Editor

Sarah H. AlemanIDRA Data Entry Clerk

Newsletter Typesetter

Permission to reproduce material con-tained herein is granted provided the ar-ticle or item is reprinted in its entirety andproper credit is given to IDRA and theauthor. Please send a copy of the materialin its reprinted form to the IDRA Newslet-ter production offices. Editorial submis-sions, news releases. subscription re-quests, and change-of-address data shouldbe submitted in writing to the NewsletterProduction Editor. The IDRA Newsletterstaff welcomes your comments on edito-rial material.

Schoolwide Projects - continued from page I

"We have all this money that we do notknow what to do with." These commentsbecome especially troublesome when noone seems to be able to articulate the mannerin which the funds will improve theeducational achievement of students.

In all fairness, administrators havebeen provided little, if any, direction on theintegration of federal funds and resources ina schoolwide project. Many schooladministrators welcome ideas on how toassess the degree to which their campus is

implementing a genuine schoolwide reformproject and a set of indicators that they canuse to make this assessment. In essence,they would welcome more specificguidelines for ensuring schoolwide programsuccess for all students.

The purpose of this article is tosynthesize the literature on effectiveschoolwide reform strategies used incampuses that have been successful with

LEP students and to provide schooladministrators and site-based committeemembers with some insights on how toeffectively plan improvement on a campuswith a diverse student population.

Research Basefor Schoolwide Reform thatis Effective with LEP Students

While defining initiatives for aschool wide program, principals and the site-based committee members at campuses withLEP students would benefit from aframework that integrates schoolwideresearch findings with specific findings aboutsuccessful schools with LEP students. Inother words, the framework defines eachfinding as it relates to campuses with LEPstudents. I have consulted and gleanedcritical information from the followingsources to propose a framework foraddressing the needs of LEP students in aschoolwide program.

Researchers like E. Pechman and L.Fiester (1994) and S. Stringfield, M.A.Millsap, E. Scott and R. Herman (1996)have documented the features ofsuccessful schoolwide programs, and theyhave validated the original premise onwhich schoolwide programs wereestablished.Pechman and Fiester provide ideas andsuggestions on how successful reformmovements have incorporated efforts toimprove the achievement levels of LEPstudents (1994).B. McLeod summarized findings of afour-year study conducted through 12

EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS FORM

MEANINGFUL PARTNERSHIPS WITH

FAMILIES, THE COMMUNITY AND THE

BUSINESS SECTOR...OVERALL, THE

WHOLE SCHOOL SHARES A BELIEF

THAT SUCCESS IS ATTAINABLE AND

THAT THE SCHOOL CAN MAKE A

POSITIVE DIFFERENCE IN THE LIVES

OF ALL STUDENTS.

U.S. Department of Education projectsthat studied education reform efforts invarious areas including student diversityand students considered at risk (1996).These findings are summarized in fourbooklets that address languagedevelopment, curriculum and instruction,school organization, and parentinvolvement.E.E. Garcia surveyed seven effectivebilingual education classrooms in threePhoenix-area elementary schools andidentified characteristics in six areas thatwere common in these classrooms: schoolleadership and processes, social climate,curriculum, instruction, staffing, andassessment (1987).The Charles A. Dana Center, with supportfrom the STAR Center, studied 26successful schools (schools that had ahigh percentage of students who receivefree or reduced-price lunches) in Texasand organized their findings into sixthemes. Successful schoolwide programs:(1) focus on the academic success ofevery student, (2) make no excuses, (3)experiment, (4) are inclusive: everyoneis part of the solution, (5) have a sense offamily, (6) demonstrate collaboration andtrust, and (7) have a passion for learningand growing (Lein, Johnson and Ragland,1996).IDRA conducted a survey of schools thatwere successful as demonstrated throughtheir high achievement on the TexasAssessment of Academic Skills (TAAS)test. Its findings show that schools requireboth a long-term and short-termimprovement initiative in other words,an overall health improvement as well asa band-aid for the current specific ailment(Villarreal, 1994).A group of researchers from theUniversity of Texas at Austincollaborated with the Education ServiceCenter at Region I in Texas to study

Schoolwide Projects - continued on page I I

January 1997 u IDRA Newsletter 3

A DIFFERENT KIND OF WILL:

EDUCATIONAL EQUITY AND THE SCHOOL REFORM MOVEMENT

This country is in a time of great I

change and flux. Nowhere is this more I

evident than in the tremendous changethat is occurring in public schools. Thegoals and challenges the schools of thisnation face include being re-created towork for very different students anddiverse populations, producing world-classstudents with world-class skills that willallow them to compete in a global economyand ensuring that a greater number of thesestudents complete high school, at least, andpossibly seek post-secondary schoolingwhile moving into their vital civic and workresponsibilities. The challenges, however,go beyond these alone.

In order for those who operate publicschools to meet these goals, educators andcommunities will have to examine howschools currently work and where they arenot being successful. They will have toexplore new ways of restructuring schoolsso that they work more efficiently for agreater number of students who differ byrace, gender, ethnicity, languagecharacteristic, economic class and socialcircumstance. Given this challenge, it alsobecomes apparent that new paradigms areneeded for thinking and acting regardingequal educational opportunity, excellence,equity and the protection of the civil rightsof students in schools. In fact, the majorchallenge faced by schools and thecommunities they serve is to produce equity-based excellence. These challenges will notbe easy to confront, but they are manageableso long as those involved in the pursuit ofequity-based excellence exercise thedetermination to see the challenge throughto the end.

Certainly big challenges raise bigquestions. Who must initiate the changesthat need to occur? What will be required ofthem? What concerns must they face inrestructuring schools to produce equity-based excellence? What will such excellencelook like? What will be the evidence thatsuccess is being achieved? What will thealternative look like should this nation notbe able to meet the challenge? This article isintended to answer these and other questionsas a way of forging a critical action path forchange agents including school leaders andtheir staffs. community-based leaders,

\s,

parents and students.

radlerScott'0*

without equity? These are the tough questionsthat must be answered. How to mesh equity

and excellence in a seamless manner and7 v to make this alliance a regular part of

Considering EquityThose who operate public schools are

truly working to produce excellent resultsfor students. They, and people in thecommunity, are working together torestructure schools to improve academicoutcomes for students in ways that arevirtually unprecedented.

Public education has been reshapedby the creation of the Goals 2000: EducateAmerica Act, the Improving America 'sSchools Act of 1994 (reauthorization of theElementary and Secondary Education Act),the School to Work Opportunities Act andensuing state and local initiatives. Whilereformers have initiated these activities andconversations about excellence abound, theplatitude, "all students can learn" has becomethe battle cry of schools and communitiesaround the United States (and evidenceshows that the slogan is true).

However, the part of the discussionthat still requires clear articulation is therole of equity. What is educational equity?How is it related to equal educationalopportunity? How do we create schools thatare equitable? Who must be involved? Howmust they be involved? Where do we begin?

Clearly all students in public schoolsshould be the focus of any discussion andresultant actions that occur. Moreimportantly, however, is the fact that all ofthe stakeholders must identify and accepttheir part in the creation of the answers thatare formulated wherever equity is concerned.

Such clarity concerning these issuesdoes not yet exist. There is a place for equityin excellence, but where that place is andhow to make it real are the persistent struggleswith which the nation must grapple. Supposewe stretched the limits of the discussion tosuggest that there can be no excellence

school and community activities istoday's compelling issue. If this issuecannot be confronted forthrightly, the

nation will fall far short of its aims to produceworld-class students skilled and competentenough to compete on a global economicand political stage.

What the Research SaysThe nation is not at all sure of what is

actually being produced in public education.Everyone has gained understanding aboutthe kinds of skills and competencies studentswill need to prepare for the global world ofwork, but the country still struggles withunderstanding how to produce those skillsand competencies among a more diversestudent population.

On April 18, 1991, the Bushadministration issued America 2000 AnEducation Strategy, in which the presidentand the secretary of education challengedthe nation to reinvent the nation's publicschools. In that same year, 30 experts in thefield of education came together to create athoughtful debate on the possibleimplications ofthe strategy. Their commentsand essays appeared in a document entitledVoices from the Field.

In that publication, Dr. Jose A.Cardenas, then executive director of theIntercultural Development ResearchAssociation, cautioned:

New standards must be accompanied bynew strategies so that the extensivenumber ofstudents who have failed underthe old standard can succeed.Comparisons of schools, districts andstates will demonstrate what is alreadyknown: that some segments of thepopulation perform deplorably in theeducation process. School, district andstate characteristics will be reflected inthese comparisons...The challenge is toprovide assistance to students [who] arenot performing well, not to furtherstigmatize them (1991).

Researchers P. Keating and J. Oakesposed the question, "Ifreal reform is possible,

A Different Kind of Will- continued on page 4

January 1997 IDRA aewsletter

A Different Kind of Will - continued from page 3

where might one look to identify the mostserious problems and practices as candidatesfor fundamental change especially thosethat have the most damaging impact ondisadvantaged youth?" (1988). Theyconcluded there were four areas, including:(1) testing practices that limit learningopportunities for these students; (2)groupingand tracking practices that relegatedisadvantaged students to the lowest-qualityknowledge and the poorest-preparedteachers; (3) curriculum and instructionpractices that are fragmented and low-level,"following narrowly behavioral, rather thancognitive, models of learning"; and (4)school management practices that embracecentralized, top-down, factory productionmodels rather than responsive andprofessional decision making at the schoolsites (Keating and Oakes, 1988).

Keating and Oakes suggested 11policy options that should be at work inschools to eliminate barriers and assureeducational equity.

Place equal educational access high onthe public policy agenda.Eliminate the remaining vestiges of raceand gender bias in schooling practicesand curriculum materials.

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, ALL OF

THE SCHOOL REFORM EFFORTS IN

THE NATION WILL DO LITTLE TO NO

GOOD UNLESS ALL STUDENTS

BENEFIT FROM THE CHANGES THAT

OCCUR. ONLY SCHOOL REFORM

DRIVEN BY A NOTION OF EQUITY

AND MEASURED BY THE STANDARDS

OF EQUITY CAN BE DEEMED

EFFECTIVE IN ASSURING THAT ALL

STUDENTS HAVE A FAIR,

COMPARABLE OPPORTUNITY TO

LEARN, TO ACHIEVE AND TO EXCEL.

Upgrade teaching and increase the accessof disadvantaged students to highlyqualified teachers.Alter formulas for compensatoryeducational resources and services toaccount for the impact of the longevityand high rates of poverty in schools.Eliminate rewards for assessing andlabeling students on the bases of socialand/or personal dispositions.

Develop model, integrated curricula andinstructional strategies suitable to diversegroups of students.Provide incentives for schools to forgenon-traditional alliances among schools,families and communities.Join forces with all those who have astake in schools: universities, socialservice agencies, the private sector.De-regulate schools and build capacityfor improvement.Hold schools accountable for both equityand learning.Marshal new resources and reconfigureexisting ones to give schools greaterautonomy and flexibility to excel (Keatingand Oakes, 1988).

Equity-based ExcellenceThe challenge before the nation is to

produce restructured schools that have, as apart of their regular way of operating, theproduction of equity-based excellentoutcomes for all students. How must this beaccomplished?

Producing excellence for somestudents and not all is discrimination. It is aviolation of federal law regarding theprotection of an individual's civil rights to

A Different Kind of Will- continued on page 5

First Generation1954-1964

Second Generation1964-1983

Third Generation1983-Present

Fourth GenerationFuture

Focus Physical desegregation Equal treatment and equalaccess within schoolachievement

Physical resegregation

Equal opportunities tolearn

Equal outcomes-achievement, attitudes, andbehaviors

Schools that work fordiverse students

Teach world-class skills

New paradigms for civilrights and equity-basedexcellence

Desegregation Physical assignment plans

ConcernsElimination of racialisolation

Elimination of bias andstereotypes

BEST COPY AVAiLABLE

Access to courses andprograms

Access to languagedevelopment

Elimination of practicesthat lead to isolation ordifferential treatmentbased on race, sex andnational origin

5Reprinted .from tlw "The Fourth Generation of Desegregation and Civil Rights.IDRA Newsletter. January. 1995.

Culturally-sensitive, bias-free curriculum andinstruction

Use of varied instructionalmethods for differentcultural and learning styles

Heightened teacherexpectations

Development of positiveself-concept

Elimination ofachievement gaps

Restructured professionaldevelopment

Use of culturally-sensitivecurriculum

Development of lifelonglearning competencies

Instruction in technology,information management,math and science, anddiversity

Creation of school andcommunity collaborationson social issues affectingschools

January 1997 101 IDRA Newsletter

A Different Kind of Will - continued from page 4

equal educational opportunity. The NationalCoalition of Advocates for Students includesequal educational opportunity in its list ofentitlements all students deserve in publicschools (see box at right).

This is a framework for the productionof equity-based excellence. Others havecalled for equity and excellence in publicschools as a way of assuring the UnitedStates' pre-eminence as a world leader.Researcher F. McKenzie explains:

The economic necessity is becoming thekey to increasing our commitment toeducational equity...It is clear that theshaping of educational policy mustinclude a reshaping of schools andcommunity colleges to better equip themto meet the challenges of providingeducational equity (1993).

Dr. Jose Cardenas suggests that asschools restructure, they also need toembrace a new educational paradigm thathas the following three characteristics toproduce equitable educational outcomes foratypical students:

Without exception, the program staffshould value students in ways not foundin traditional schools;Students participating in schools andprograms in those schools should receivesupport services that are not provided intraditional school programs; andSchools and programs should createunique home and school relationshipsnot found in traditional school programs(Cardenas, 1995).

Cardenas also presents adevelopmental matrix involving 77 cellsthat describe what an equity-based excellentschool would look like (1995).

Lee, et al., showed compellingevidence that such restructuring effortsproduce organic rather than bureaucraticschool organizations that depart fromconventional practices rather than adheringto conventional ones (1994). They startedwith a sample size of 22,000 students inabout 1,000 U.S. middle-grade schools. Theyfollowed these students into high school in1990. After the application of certain datafilters (such as students attending Catholicor elite private secondary schools), theyended with a student sample size of 11,794sophomores in 820 high schools. Theirfindings include the following.

Students attending schools that arerestructured learn more in mathematics,reading, history and science.Students learn more in smaller rather

CHILDREN'S ENTITLEMENTS

Children are entitled to have parents, advocates and concerned educatorsinvolved in all decisions affecting their education.

Children are entitled to learn in an integrated, heterogeneous setting responsiveto different learning styles and abilities.

Children are entitled to comprehensible, culturally supportive anddevelopmentally appropriate curriculum and teaching strategies.

Children are entitled to access to a common body of knowledge and theopportunity to acquire higher-order skills.

Children are entitled to a broadly-based assessment of their academic progressand grading structures that enhance individual strengths and potential.

Children are entitled to a broad range of support services that addressindividual needs.

Children are entitled to attend schools that are safe, attractive and free fromprejudice.

Children are entitled to attend school unless they pose a danger to otherchildren or school staff.

Children are entitled to instruction by teachers who hold high expectations forall students and who are fully prepared to meet the challenges of diverseclassrooms.

Children are entitled to an equal educational opportunity supported by theprovision of greater resources to schools serving students most vulnerable toschool failure.

National Coalition of Advocates for Students

than larger restructured high schoolenvironments.Students are more engaged in smallerrestructured schools, and engagement ismore equitably distributed. (Equity inthis study only referred to socioeconomicstatus.)Students learn more science in schoolswith better resources.Schools committed to restructuringshould decide on a modest number ofreform strategies and engage thesestrategies in depth. Doing so increasesthe likelihood of significant gains instudent achievement in restructuredschools (Lee, et al., 1994).

According to their findings,restructured, organic, smaller schools thatfocus on fewer rather than many reformefforts can make a difference in studentachievement outcomes (Lee, et al., 1994).

IASA-Sparked Reform Can Furtherthe Goals of Equity

It is surprising to think that "equalopportunity" may be a term of the past. Withthe passage of the Improving America 'sSchools Act in 1994 and the Goals 2000:Educate America Act, the Department of

Education established the foundation for anew kind of consideration of equity in publicschools. Where once equal educationalopportunity was clearly the goal, these twopieces of legislation strongly support thenotion that while equal educationalopportunity is necessary, it may not besufficient to bring about high achievementoutcomes for all children regardless of race,sex, national origin, economic circumstanceor handicapping condition.

The IASA and Goals 2000 suggest anotion originally described in a 1989publication ofthe 10 Regional DesegregationAssistance Centers called The Resegregationof Public Schools: The Third Generation(Scott, 1995). The creators describededucational equity as a strategy designed toprovide differentiated educational responsesto students who are different in importantways so that these comparable educationaloutcomes may be achieved.. From aneducational perspective, all learners cannotbe treated the same because their differentlearning, social, cultural, emotional,psychological and physical needs(characteristics) naturally give rise to varyinginterventions for them to achieve

A Different Kind of Will- continued on page 10

January 1997 IDRA Newsletter

IDRA'S PROJECT FLAIR: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT MODEL

ADDRESSES LITERACY DEVELOPMENT FROM A SCHOOLWIDE PERSPECTIVE

Schoolwide programs focus on theneeds of students in high-poverty schools toensure that every student succeeds. They arebuilt on the understanding that students aremost successful when the entire schoolsupports the education of all students. Thisunderstanding is supported by a strongresearch base.

Under Title I of the 1994reauthorization of the Elementary andSecondary Education Act (ESEA), schoolsserving 50 percent of students from low-income families can become schoolwideprograms to expand the flexibility and qualityof the education they offer students. Title Iis no longer about pulling out students orusing remediation strategies and othertemporary approaches attempting to addressthe special needs of some students. Title I isnow about integrating resources, facilitiesand materials with quality teaching that iscutting-edge and strategically aligned withthe educational needs of students on thecampus.

Researchers learned during the late1980s that improving the entire school, ratherthan targeting the poorest-performingstudents, improves the education of allstudents. Schoolwide programs are aboutgetting everyone on campus to commit tosupporting instructional programs of higherorder thinking skills, accelerated curriculumand effective teaching strategies. The focusis on the students to ensure that everyone

succeeds. Thus, successful schoolwideprograms do the following:

identify students' needs and decide howto meet them;engage and expand on students' naturalgifts and talents;work together to help every child achievethe same challenging standards;design educational programs that areconsistent with state and local reformefforts;meet the special needs of children whoare at risk academically, limited Englishproficient, migrant or homeless;break through traditional fundinglimitations by combining resources frommultiple funding streams to promotechildren's learning;seek support and guidance from fellowpractitioners within the district and acrossthe state who have successfully shifted tousing ESEA resources school-wide; andevaluate success in terms of increasedachievement by students at greatest riskof failing to meet state standards (U.S.Department of Education, 1996).

Even with these guidelines, a recentstudy of schools in Texas found that there isno magic formula, prescription or miracleprogram. The study was conducted by theCharles A. Dana Center at the University ofTexas at Austin with support from the TexasEducation Agency and the STAR Center (acollaboration of the Dana Center, IDRA

No TWO SCHOOLWIDE PROGRAMS ARE ALIKE, BUT THE BEST ARE

driven by rigorous standards for upgrading the instructional program of the

entire school;

flexible, offering a high-quality curriculum geared to bringing students up to the

challenging levels of knowledge set for them;

comprehensively planned, using available federal program resources tosupport cohesive instruction; and

result-oriented, increasing the achievement of children in the targeted groupsthat federal education programs were intended to serve.

Pechman. E. and L. Fiester. An Idea Book: Implementing SchoolwideProjects. (Washington. D.C.: U.S. Department ofEducation, Planningand Evaluation Service. 1994). 7

and RMC Research Corporation), thecomprehensive regional assistance center inTexas (1996). The findings revealed moredifferences than similarities in theinstructional programs and 'approaches ofthe 26 schools studied. While some schoolsused whole language teaching approaches,others used phonics. Some programs usedcutting-edge instructional technology, whileothers used none. Some schools used Levin's"Accelerated Schools Project," and othersused the "Success for All" program fromJohn Hopkins University. "ReadingRecovery" approaches were used by someschools, while others were not using anyspecific program or methodology at all.

Although these schools did notperceive themselves as perfect, theyrecognized a potential for growth and werecommitted to seeing ongoing improvement.Each school had an area of strength as wellas an area of weakness, yet they had all'

achieved important and impressive results.The common characteristics of these

schools include the following. Each school:Focuses on the academic success of everystudent;Makes no excuses;Experiments;Is inclusive Everyone is seen as a partof the solution;Has a sense of family;Demonstrates collaboration and trust;Exhibits a passion for learning andgrowing.

This detailed study, Successful TexasSchoolwide Programs, can be obtainedthrough the Charles A. Dana Center (512/471-6190).

Shifting to a schoolwide approachgives teachers new opportunities to enrichinstruction and accelerate student learning.Their involvement is critical in the reformprocess. Their expertise can be easily tappedbecause they know the school much betterthan anyone else and they know what needsto be changed. This means that teachersmust be supported in what they are doingand must be provided with appropriateprofessional development.

An example ofan effective schoolwideapproach is IDRA's Project FLAIR(Focusing on Language and Academic

IDRA's Project FLAIR - continued on page 7

January 1997 IDRA Newsletter

IDRA PUBLICATION AVAILABLE

Hispanic Families As Valued Partners: An Educator's Guideby Maria Robledo Montecel, Ph.D., Aurora Gallagher, Aurelio M. Montemayor, M.Ed.,

Abelardo Villarreal. Ph.D., Ninta Adame- Revna, M.S. and Josie D. Supik, M.A.

This publication explores the role of Hispanic families, particularlyparents, in U.S. education. Through a presentation of facts about Hispanicsin the United States and an honest discussion of Hispanic.cultural valuesand mores, the authors dispel the myths that many educators have abouttheir Hispanic students' families. Most importantly, the book focuses onthe common ground shared by schools and Hispanic homes mostnotably that education is important. It seeks to show administrators andteachers the value of family participation in education. Instructions andworksheets for implementing a parental involvement program tailored tothe needs of Hispanic families and a comprehensive resources list are alsoprovided. (90 Pages; 1993; $19.95)

sR

Available from IDRA at 5835 Callaghan Road, Suite 350, San Antonio, Texas 78228-1190; 210/684-8180; fax 210/684-5389; E-mail:idra@idra.org.

IDRA's Project FLAIR - continued from page 6

Instructional Renewal). This project is anoutgrowth of IDRA'.s reading project thathas assisted schools as they shift toschoolwide programs and subsequentlyimprove students' academic successdramatically. Project FLAIR is designed toincrease cognitive growth and academicachievement for all students, includinglanguage minority students, through anintensive language-across-the-curriculumprogram. Currently, 13 schools are usingProject FLAIR to support their schoolwideapproach.

Personnel at each participatingcampus, with the guidance of an IDRAconsultant, analyze and evaluate theirinstructional program to determine how wellit reflects the best practices recommendedfor culturally and linguistically diversestudents. A task force of administrators andteachers develops annual goals andobjectives designed to improve language-minority student achievement, and membersselect a set of instructional strategies formonthly training on their campus.

The first year of the project ends witha day of reflection in which the campus taskforce members evaluate the success of theproject and plan for the second year. Theythen choose another set of instructionalstrategies for monthly training and decidehow to mentor and train new teachers duringthe second year. The project's third yearcontinues to increase the repertoire ofinstructional strategies available to teachersand expands training to the rest of the teachers

on the campus.This three-year process incorporate

all components of an effective schoolwideprogram. It includes assessment,development of a model based on findings,and development of a mission and a visionstatement through the selected people whowill carry out the process. The projectincludes professional development thatprovides research-based strategies,mentoring and coaching, along withclassroom demonstration. Project FLAIRhas a comprehensive monitoring system withformative evaluations throughout each yearand a formal summative evaluation at theend of each year.

Specifically, Project FLAIR addressesrequirements of a schoolwide programthrough the following eight components:

Comprehensive needs assessment.A comprehensive needs assessment is criticalfor designing the program, professionaldevelopment and evaluation. Classroomobservations, faculty and staff interviewsand workshop evaluations are the primarymeans of data collection.

Best-practice school reformstrategies. Cutting-edge practices based onthe latest research provide guidance. Becauseschoolwide programs require adjustmentsfor many schools, a comprehensive approachis necessary and is an integral part of ProjectFLAIR.

Highly qualified instructional staffwho promote high student achievement.These are the teachers who participate basedon their ability to alter curriculum and

instruction to accommodate students'strengths and needs. The assumption is thatthey, along with the curriculum, willchallenge the students academically.Therefore, strategies the teachers will betrained to implement through the project arebased on the latest research in the fields ofbilingual and English as a second language(ESL) education and language arts education.They foster listening, speaking, reading,and writing skills and can be used for allcontent areas and with students who arebelow, on or above grade level. Teachersare taught how to use the strategies, how tomodify them for various grade levels andhow to assess student progress in masteringtheir complexities.

Assuming ownership and "buyinginto" the program is an essential part of theproject. Just as all students are to be regardedhighly, so should the teachers. They are thelink between student learning and teachingto the established high standards. Throughthe project, they work in teams and learnhow to provide the right amount of resourcesfor their students. They also learn aboutresearch-based programs that may involveintensive instruction such as use oftechnology, fostering cultural pride andbuilding student self-concept.

Qualified to involve all members ofthe school community. Professionaldevelopment is a high priority. It is mosteffective when the participants helpdetermine the content. In addition to teachers,professional development should include

IDRA's Project FLAIR - continued on page 14

January 1997 II IDRA Newsletter

RFST COPY AVAILABLE

THE WHOLE SCHOOL, THE WHOLE CHILD

Editor's Note: The following is excerpted from an interview of Mrs. Elfida Gutierrez, principal of Hueco

Elementary School in the Socorro Independent School District in El Paso, Texas. The interview was

conducted by Liz Lilliott as part of the Successful Texas Schoolwide Programs Research Project

conducted by the Charles A. Dana Center through a contract from the Texas Education Agency and with

funding support from the STAR Center.

What are the major areas upon which Hueco is focused this year?Attendance is an important focus. We know it is important that students are coming to school and

Elfida Gutierrezthat they like school. Although it's hard to measure concretely, we know we want to focus on making the

kids feel good about themselves and school in general. Technology is an important focus. Our whole

district is pushing technology. We know that's the wave of the future.In terms of academics, the learning styles program has been a good avenue for us to reach all of our kids. We have discovered that

when we have had so much flexibility with our budget, we can buy a variety of materials, but we need to focus on how to teach, not what

we use to teach. Therefore, we adopted a focus on learning styles. Teachers use a variety of approaches. A lot of them use cooperative

learning strategies. I believe in whole language and cooperative learning. I profess them and find research that supports them, and I share

the research with the staff. To promote good instructional practices, I have teachers go visit other teachers who are very successful.

Teaching strategies that involve students with language are very important for our students. I always tell teachers that our students are going

to develop good language skills only if they are speaking, interacting and involved with language throughout the school day.

TAAS has several indicators that really lend themselves to saying kids must be actively involved in learning. We've gone away from

the lecture style of teaching, into a lot of student interaction. Once teachers try a more interactive style, they know that it works for them,

and the kids like their education. So we focus on learning styles and finding good ways to teach that are comfortable for the teachers and

that keep kids actively involved.

So is all of that new for this year?No, we moved into it slowly, about two years ago. We worked very closely with our Title I coordinator for the district, who brought

in learning styles. We had maybe three or four teachers go, and they justloved it and came back and implemented it. The next year, more

teachers went, and this coming training session we have about three more teachers going. We selected some teachers who would come

back, sell the program and be good models.

How are things different now from how they were in the past, when you first got here?When I first got here, one of the things that I noticed was that the campus plan did not have measurable objectives. We have been

involved in writing our campus plan for maybe seven years. I was lucky to have a friend, who was the instructional director at the time,

who came to our campus and said, "You need to write objectives that you can measure at the end of the year and monitor throughout the

year." Whereas, the campus plan had a bunch of goals (i.e., "We will do this" statements), it never said how or to what extent. So we went

back and looked at our plan so that it will, for the most part, have measurable objectives.

We looked at the data and saw that our kids in first grade were all reading at the primary level, and we wanted them to be on the

first grade level. We wanted goals that were appropriate for our students. So, wemeasured language development, writing and mathematics

and for the upper grades (3,4,5). It's really easy because we use the TAAS for the most part to measure our growth. We also have goals

for attendance.Now, our campus plan can be divided into two major goal areas: one deals with student performance and the other is affective. The

affective goals focus on establishing a positive environment for students, faculty and the community. Our incentive program and the

"sunshine committee" are initiatives that came out of our affective goals.We believe that the less complex we get about a campus plan, the better off we are, and the more likely it will become like a guide

for improving student performance. The plan keeps us organized and aligned with our goals.

So how do you assess what bilingual children take the TAAS or not? Does the teacher decide?

Pretty much so. They go to the LPAC committee. Last year we had a form that said which of the kids were going to take the TAAS

where it would not be a negative experience for them. They take it for assessment, to see if they can exit the program. Our program model

is the transitional model. There is some good in it and there are things that sometimes are notgood, but that's the most we have. It's a strongly

transitional model. The teacher pretty much decides.I think we can find other assessments for our students, like the SABE. We'll test their Spanish reading and Spanish writing. We'll

tease them because they're reading in Spanish. They're going to be good readers in English. They can write well in Spanish. Once theyThe Whole School - continued on page 9

January 1997 IDRA Newsletter

D E 17E4

C ASS°C

IDRA Newsletter

CUMULATIVE INDEX

JANUARY 1996 - DECEMBER 1996

AAchieving Gender Equity in Multicul-

tural Bilingual Education: A Reviewof ESL: The Whole Person Approach,A. Solis, (3-96) 7-9

ACCOUNTABILITY (see SCHOOLS)

Administrator's Alert: Sexual Harass-ment is Everybody's Business, B.Scott, (3-96) 4, 9

Adult Literacy Outreach Innovations:Porque Significa Tanto, C.L.Goodman, (8-96) 1-2, 9-10, 12

ADULT LITERACY OUTREACH

INNOVATIONS, (8-96) 1-2, 9-10, 12;(8-96) 3-4, 12

ADVOCACY, (1-96) 3-5; (1-96) 11-12; (3-96) 11-14; (4-96) 9-10

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, (2-96) 1, 10-13;(7-96) 7-8, 17

Affirmative Action: Not a Thing of thePast, L. Cantii, (2-96) 1, 10-13

Alice Dickerson Montemayor's FeministChallenge to LULAC in the 1930s, C.Orozco, (3-96) 11-14

ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS, (7-96) 6, 8

ASSESSMENT, (6-96) 1, 12-14; (10-96) 3-4, 8-9

ATTRITION (see STUDENTS, ATTRITION)

Audit Reports TEA Drop Out Measure isInaccurate, (9-96) 7

BBastian, Ann, (10-96) 16-17Bauer, Hilaria, (4 -96) 1, 13Berlin Walls of the Mind, W.S. White,

(10-96) 10-11, 18BILINGUAL, (9-96) 8-9; (1-96) 6-7, 14; (3-

96) 7-9EDUCATION, (1-96) 8-9; (3-96) 7-9; (8-

96) 5, 8; (10-96) 3-4, 8-9; (10-96)

3; (10-96) 12-15, 20TEACHERS (see TEACHERS)

(see also LANGUAGE ACQUISITION)

Bilingual Education is About Bridgingand Building, M. Robledo Montecel,(10-96) 3-4, 8-9

CCantu, Linda, (2-96) 1, 10-13; (3-96) 3,

6; (6-96) 1, 12-14Carmona, Abel, (1-96) 6-7, 14; (5-96) 7-8Cavazos, Charles A., (1-96) 3-5Celebrating Cultural Differences:

Integrating the Language and Cultureof Staff and Students in Campus Life,A.M. Montemayor, (2-96) 6, 14

"CHILDREN FIRST," (9-96) 1, 13-16; (9-96) 14

Children of America, Take Your Mark.Ready. Set. Wait a Minute, B. Scott,(4-96) 3-5

Children's Defense Fund, (4-96) 9-10CHIME (Clearinghouse for Immigrant

Education): Service Provides Accessto Information on the Education ofImmigrant Students, A.M.Montemayor, (5-96) 6

CIVIL RIGHTS (see EQUITY; DESEGREGATION

ASSISTANCE)

COCA-COLA VALUED YOUTH PROGRAM,

(7-96) 19; (9-96) 3, 7; (9-96) 11; (9-96) 11, 16NATIONAL TRAINING SEMINAR AND

VALUED YOUTH CONFERENCE, (2-96)

9; (3-96) 10; (4-96) 14Coca-Cola Valued Youth Program

Expands, (9-96) 11, 16Coca-Cola Valued Youth Program

Receives La Promesa Award, (9-96),11

Coca-Cola Valued Youth Program Tutors

Carry Olympic Flame, (7-96) 19Content in Context: Technology that

Makes Sense in Education, F. Montes,(6-96) 3-6

Cortez, Albert, (1-96) 8-9; (5-96) 3, 4-5,10-12; (10-96) 1, 19

Creative Collaboratives: EmpoweringImmigrant Students and FamiliesThrough Education, J. Supik and A.Cortez, (5-96) 3, 10-12

CREATIVE COLLABORATIVES:

EMPOWERING IMMIGRANT STUDENTS

AND FAMILIES THROUGH EDUCATION,

(5-96) 1, 13-16; (5-96) 3, 10-12

DDESEGREGATION ASSISTANCE, (2-96) 1,

10-13; (2-96) 3-4, 9; (3-96) 4, 9; (5-(4-96) 3-5; (7-8; (9-96) 10, 16;

Desegregation to Inclusion: Embracing aFull Spectrum of Diversity, L.C.Green, (7-96) 3-5, 16

DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE

PRACTICES, (4-96) 6-8Dispelling Myths about Immigrant

Students, A. Carmona, (5-96) 7-8DROPOUT PREVENTION (see STUDENTS,

ATTRITION)

96) 4-5; (6-96) 9-10;96) 3-5, 16; (8-96) 5,(10-96) 5-6

E"E Pluribus Unum" Strengthened By

Multicultural Education, F. Gonzales,(9-96) 10, 16

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION, (4-96) 1,

13; (4-96) 3-5; (4-96) 6-8;(4-96) 9-10; (4-96) 11-12, 15La Semana del Nifio Educators'

1 0 EST COPY AVPidia sr

READING INDEX ENTRIESAll entries in this cumulative index ofthe articles appearing in the 1996 issuesof the IDRA Newsletter include the pub-lication volume and the publication yearin parentheses followed by the page(s)on which the article can be found.

OBTAINING ARTICLE REPRINTSA copy of any article listed in this cumu-lative index may be obtained free ofchard by contacting IDRA.

The Intercultural Developm ent ResearchAssociation (IDRA) is a non-profit orga-nization with a 501(c)(3) tax exempt sta-tus. The purpose of the organization is todisseminate information concerning equal-ity of educational opportunity. The IDRANewsletter (ISSN 1069-5672, copyright©1997) serves as a vehicle for communi-cation with educators, school board mem-bers, decision-makers, parents, and thegeneral public concerning the educationalneeds of all children in Texas and acrossthe United States.

Publication office:5835 Callaghan Road, Suite 350San Antonio, Texas 78228-1190210/684-8180; Fax 210/684-5389

IDRA World Wide Web site:http://www.idra.org

IDRA E-mail Address:idra@idra.org

Maria Robledo Montecel, Ph.D.IDRA Executive Director

Newsletter Executive Editor

Christie L. Goodman, APRIDRA Communications Manager

Newsletter Production Editor

Sarah H. AlemanIDRA Data Entry Clerk

Newsletter Typesetter

Permission to reproduce material containedherein is granted provided the article oritem is reprinted in its entirety and propercredit is given to IDRA and the author.Please send a copy of the material in itsreprinted form to the IDRA Newsletterproduction offices. Editorial submissions,news releases, subscription requests, andchange-of-address data should be submit-ted in writing to the Newsletter ProductionEditor.We welcome your comments oneditorial material.

IDRA Newsletter

Institute, (2-96) 15; (3-96) 15; (4-96) 16; (9-96) 9; (10-96) 20

Edelman, Marian Wright, (4-96) 9-10EDUCATION

BILINGUAL (see BILINGUAL EDUCATION)

EARLY CHILDHOOD (see EARLY CHILD-

HOOD EDUCATION)

EXPENDITURES (see SCHOOLS, FACILITIES

AND FINANCE)

IMMIGRANT, (5-96) 1, 13-16; (5-96) 3,10-12; (5-96) 4-5; (5-96) 6; (5-96)7-8; (7-96) 17; (10-96) 3

REFORM (see SCHOOLS, POLICY)

TRENDS, (7-96) 3-5, 16Endorsers of IDRA 's "Children First"

Declaration, (9-96) 14ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND MATH

INCREASES CAREER ASPIRATIONS, (3-

96) 1, 14; (6-96) 4ENGLISH ONLY/ENGLISH PLUS, (1-96) 1,

13; (1-96) 3-5; (1-96) 4; (1-96) 6-7,14; (1-96) 8-9; (1-96) 10; (1-96) 11-12

English Only: Conversations on theInternet, A.M. Montemayor, (1-96) 1,13

English Only Defined, (1-96) 11-12English Plus Information Clearinghouse

Resolution on English Plus, (1-96) 10English Plus Proponents, (1-96) 4EQUITY, (2-96) 1, 10-13; (4-96) 3-5; (7-

96) 6, 8; (7-96) 7-8, 17; (9-96) 3, 7GENDER, (3-96) 1, 14; (3-96) 3, 6; (3-

96) 4, 9; (3-96) 7-9; (3-96) 8; (3-96) 10; (3-96) 11-14

Equity and Accountability Needed toReduce Dropout Rates, J. Supik, (9-96) 3, 7

Everything Old Seems New Again...Or IsIt? Recognizing Aversive Racism, B.Scott, (2-96) 3-4, 9

FFAMILIES/PARENTS (see PARENTS)

Families United forEducation... Conversations withParents and Friends, EDITORIAL, A.M.Montemayor, (8-96) 6-7

GGarcia, Juanita, (5-96) 1, 13-16Gchachu, Kirby, (6-96) 9-10GENDER (see EQUITY, GENDER)

Gonzales, Frank, (8-96) 5, 8; (9-96) 10,16

BEST COPY AVAiLAELF I

Goodman, Christie L., (8-96) 1-2, 9-10,12

Green, Laura Chris, (7-96) 3-5, 16

HLHabla Usted Espanol? Bilingualism is a

Tool for Business, A. Carmona, (1-96)6-7, 14

High Failure Rates: Quality or Ineffec-tiveness?, EDITORIAL, A. Villarreal, (7-

96) 10-11, 18Hill, David, (6-96) 7The Hopwood Case - What It Says, What

It Doesn't Say, The Future of the Caseand "The Rest of the Story," A.Kauffrnan, (7-96) 7-8, 17

IDRA 's MIJA Program Expands, A.Yinez-Perez, (3-96) 1, 14

I'd Never Really Thought about Being aScientist, EDITORIAL, E. Rodriguez, (6-96) 8, 15

Immigrant Education from the Adminis-trators' Perspective, P. McCollum andJ. Garcia, (5-96) 1, 13-16

Immigrant Education Policy: WhyAttempt to Fix What 's Not Broken?,A. Cortez, (5-96) 4-5

IMMIGRANTS, (2-96) 8; (5-96) 7-8; (7-96)17; (10-96) 3-4, 8-9; (10-96) 5-6(see also EDUCATION, IMMIGRANT)

Improving America's Schools RegionalConference Held, (9-96) 9

INSTRUCTION, (2-96) 6, 14; (4-96) 6-8;(4-96) 11-12, 15; (6-96) 3-6; (6-96) 9-10; (10-96) 7

INTERCULTURAL DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH

ASSOCIATION, (1-96) 4; (1-96) 14PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS, (3-96), 1, 14;

(5-96) 1, 13-16; (5-96) 3, 10-12;(6-96) 4; (6-96) 6; (7-96) 1, 14-16;(8-96) 12; (8-96) 1-2, 9-10, 12; (8-96) 3-4, 12; (8-96) 4; (8-96) 6-7;(9-96) 3, 7; (9-96) 8-9; (9-96) 11;(9-96) 11, 16 (see also STARCENTER)

PUBLICATIONS, (1-96) 5; (1-96) 13; (1-96) 15; (2-96) 14; (3-96) 13; (4-96)16; (5-96) 8; (6-96) 10; (6-96) 11;(6-96) 14; (6-96) 15; (7-96) 16; (8-96) 11; (9-96) 16; (10-96) 16; (10-96) 18

STAFF AND BOARD, (1-96) 8-9; (1-96)

14; (7-96) 20

WORKSHOPS AND EVENTS, (2-96) 9; (2-

96) 15; (3-96) 9; (3-96) 10; (3-96)15; (4-96) 10; (4-96) 14; (5-96) 11;(9-96) 9; (10-96) 9; (10-96) 20

Internet Places of Interest, (9-96) 2

JJohnson, Roy, (7-96) 12-13; (9-96) 4, 7Dr. Jose A. Cardenas Receives Cham-

pion of Equity Award, (7-96) 20

KKauffman, Albert, (7-96) 7-8, 17Keene, Tom, (5-96) 9Keeping the Faith: Valuing Parents,

A.M. Montemayor, (8-96) 3-4, 12

LLANGUAGE ACQUISITION, (3-96) 7-9; (7-

96) 1, 14-16; (8-96) 5, 8Language Legislation Before Congress,

C. Cavazos, (1-96) 3-5LIFELONG LEARNING (see LITERACY)

LITERACY, (4-96) 1, 13; (8-96) 1-2, 9-10,12; (8-96) 3-4, 12; (8-96) 4; (8-96) 6-7; (10-96) 7

Lopez del Bosque, Rogelio, (7-96) 1, 14-16

MMahoney, Kate, (6-96) 9-10Making Math and Science Relevant, K.

Mahoney and K. Gchachu, (6-96) 9-10

MATH, (3-96) 1, 14; (6-96) 1, 12-14; (6-96) 3-6; (6-96) 7; (6-96) 9-10

McCollum, Pam, (5-96) 1, 13-16; (10-96)5-6

Mobilization for Equity Highlights, L.Ocasio, (8-96) 4

MOBILIZATION FOR EQUITY, (8-96) 3-4,

12; (8-96) 4, (8-96) 6-7; (9-96) 8-9Montecel, Maria Robledo, (9-96) 1, 13-

15; (10-96) 3-4, 8-9Montemayor, Aurelio M., (1-96) 1, 13;

(2-96) 6, 14; (5-96), 6; (8-96) 3-4, 6-7,12; (9-96) 8-9

Montes, Felix, (4-96) 6-8; (6-96) 3-6MULTI -AGE GROUPING, (4-96) 6-8

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION, (9-96) 10,16; (2-96) 6, 14

NNational Council of La Raza, (2-96) 8Needed: A Massive Moral Movement to

Leave No Child Behind, EDITORIAL,M.W. Edelman, (4-96) 9-10

North Carolina Education and LawProject, (7-96) 6, 8

OObstacles to Immigrant Parent Participa-

tion in Schools, P. McCollum, (10-96)5-6

Ocasio, Linda, (8-96) 4ORGANIZING FOR SCHOOLING, (7-96) 1,

14-16; (7-96) 10-11, 18; (7-96) 7-8,17; (7-96) 6, 8; (7-96) 3-5, 16; (7-96)9; (7-96) 12-13; (7-96) 17

Orozco, Cynthia E., (3-96) 11-14Our Nation on the Fault Line: Hispanic

American Education Dropouts, (9-96)12-13

PPARENTS, (8-96) 4; (10-96) 12-15, 20

INVOLVEMENT, (5-96) 3, 10-12; (6-96)9-10; (10-96) 3-4, 8-9; (10-96) 5-6

VALUING, (8-96) 3-4, 12QUOTES FROM, (8-96) 6-7

PLAYTIME IS SCIENCE, (6-96) 9-10POLICY (see SCHOOLS, POLICY)

PRESCHOOL (see EARLY CHILDHOOD

EDUCATION)

President's Advisory Commission onEducational Excellence for HispanicAmericans, (9-96) 12-13

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, (7-96) 1,

14-16; (8-96) 1-2, 9-10, 12PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, (10-96) 1, 19; (10-

96) 3-4, 8-9; (10-96) 3; (10-96) 10-11,18; (10-96) 12-15, 20; (10-96) 16-17

Public Engagement: Making Schools OurSchools, (10-96) 3

Public Engagement Results in Support ofEducation for All Children, A. Cortezand A.A. Romero, (10-96) 1, 19

Public School Choice: Keeping the Focuson Equity, A. Bastian, (10-96) 16-17

RRACE/RACIAL EQUITY (see EQUITY;

Racism)RACISM, (2-96) 1, 10-13; (2-96) 3-4, 9;

BEST COPY AVAILABLE 12

(2-96) 6, 14; (2-96) 8READING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, (7-96)

1, 14-16RETENTION (see TEACHERS; STUDENTS)

Rodriguez, Eloy, (6-96) 8, 15Romero, Anna Alicia, (10-96) 1, 19

SSchool Finance Inequities Mean Schools

Are Not Ready to Teach, M. RobledoMontecel, (9-96) 1, 13-16

School Restructuring: A ContinuingImperative, R. Johnson, (7-96) 12-13

SCHOOLS, (5-96) 9; (7-96) 10-11, 18; (9-96) 10, 16; (10-96) 5-6ACCOUNTABILITY, (6-96) 1, 12-14; (7-

96) 6, 8; (9-96) 3, 7; (9-96) 4-7; (9-96) 7; (10-96) 3

FACILITIES AND FINANCE, (9-96) 1, 13-

16; (10-96) 3-4, 8-9; (10-96) 3POLICY, (1-96) 3-5; (1-96) 11-12; (2-

96) 8; (5-96) 4-5; (7-96) 7-8, 17;(9-96) 12-13; (9-96) 14

RESTRUCTURING, (7-96) 6, 8; (7-96) 12-13

SCIENCE, (3-96) 1, 14; (4-96) 1, 13; (6-96) 3-6; (6-96) 7; (6-96) 8, 15; (6-96)9-10; (10-96) 7

Scientific Literacy is Child's Play, H.Bauer, (4-96) 1, 13

Scott, Bradley, (2-96) 3-4, 9; (3-96) 4, 9;(4-96) 3-5

SEXUAL HARASSMENT, (3-96) 4, 9

Signs of Hope in Projects School,EDITORIAL, T. Keene, (5-96) 9

Solis, Adela, (3-96) 7-9; (10-96) 12-15,20

Sparing My Children from "The Feel-ing," EDITORIAL, R. Yzaguirre, (2-96) 8

Speaking Up for Bilingual Education,EDITORIAL, A. Cortez, (1-96) 8-9

STAR CENTER, (6-96) 7; (7-96) 9; (10-96) 12

STUDENT FINANCIAL AID PACKAGE, (8-96)

12

STUDENTS, (4-96) 3-5; (4-96) 9-10; (5-96)7-8ATTRITION/RETENTION, (7-96) 10-11,

18; (9-96) 3, 7: (9-96) 4-7; (9-96)7; (9-96) 12-13

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT (LEP)

INSTRUCTION OF (see INSTRUCTION,

BILINGUAL/ESL)

QUOTES FROM, (9-96) 8-9

Supik, Josie Danini, (5-96) 3, 10-12; (9-96) 3, 7

Supporting School Improvement in

1996 Cumulative Index El

Reading Through ProfessionalDevelopment, R. Lopez del Bosqueand A. Villarreal, (7-96) 1, 14-16

A Synergistic Multi-age Model forMinority Students, F. Montes, (4-96)6-8

TTAAS Math Performance, L. Cantu, (6-

96) 1, 12-14TEACHERS, (3-96) 3, 6TEACHING STRATEGIES (see INSTRUCTION)

TECHNOLOGY, (4-96) 11-12, 15; (6-96) 3-

6; (6-96) 7INTERNET, (1-96) 1, 13; (3-96) 8; (9-

96) 2SOFTWARE, (6-96) 3-6

Technology, Teachers and Early Child-hood, A. Yanez-Perez, (4-96) 11-12,15

TESTING (see ASSESSMENT)

Texas Statewide Systemic Initiative, D.Hill, (6-96) 7

Top 10 Questions Parents Should AskAbout Bilingual Education at TheirChild's Campus, A. Villarreal and A.Solis, (10-96) 12-15, 20

Two-way Bilingual Education: A PositiveWay to "Cry Woof " F. Gonzales, (8-96) 5, 8

UUp or Down: The Dropout Dilemma in

Texas, R.L. Johnson, (9-96) 4-7USE OF PUBLIC MONEY FOR PRIVATE

SCHOOLING, (10-96) 3; (10-96) 16-17

BEST COPY AVALAUF

VVigil, Joseph, (10-96) 7Villarreal, Abelardo, (7-96) 10-11, 18;

(10-96) 12-15, 20

rr

What Adults Should Know AboutTeenagers, A.M. Montemayor, (9-96)8-9

What is Science Literacy?, J. Vigil, (10-96) 7

White, William S., (10-96) 10-11, 18Women in Education Fields, L. Cantu,

(3-96) 3, 6WOMEN'S HISTORY, (3-96) 11-14World Wide Web Sites on Gender Equity

and Other On-line Resources onGender Equity, (3-96) 8

YYanez-Perez, Aurora, (3-96) 1, 14; (4-

96) 11-12, 15YOUNG SCIENTISTS ACQUIRING ENGLISH,

(6-96) 6Yzaguirre, Raul, (2-96) 8

13

IDRA NewsletterFocus Issues

Each IDRA Newsletter concen-trates on one particular topic. In1996, the topics included thefollowing.

ENGLISH PLUS, NOT ENGLISH

ONLY

VOLUME XXIII, No. 1, JANUARY

RACISM

VOLUME XXIII, No. 2,FEBRUARY

GENDER EQUITY

VOLUME XXIII, No. 3, MARCH

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION

VOLUME XXIII, No. 4, APRIL

IMMIGRANT EDUCATION

VOLUME XXIII, No. 5, MAY

MATH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION

VOLUME XXIII, No. 6,JUNE-JULY

ORGANIZING FOR SCHOOLING

VOLUME XXIII, No. 7, AUGUST

LIFELONG LEARNING AND

LEADERSHIP

VOLUME XXIII, No. 8,SEPTEMBER

STAYING IN SCHOOL

VOLUME XXIII, No. 9,OCTOBER

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

VOLUME XXIII, No. 10,

IDRA is a nonprofit educational, research and development organization dedicated

to the improvement of education opportunities for all children. Through research, materials development, training,

technical assistance, evaluation, and information dissemination, we're helping to create schools that work for all children.

The Whole School - continued from page 8

acquire that language and comprehension, they'll be good writers in English.The teachers do a good job in getting our students ready for the TAAS. It hasn't been a big problem for us to say we're going to

give them all the TAAS. They do well. But still we need to take every individual student into consideration. And we don't exempt manystudents. We didn't exempt our kids from the TAAS unless they were like level one and then all the children who were in special education,and they were monolingual English instruction for a long time. The purpose of our testing is to find out how we are doing, how thestudentsare doing, how everybody is doing, then to do an assessment appropriate for the student.

Is there any sort of enforcement of the plan? How is follow-through ensured?We follow through every so often. I bring the plan to the SIT (School Improvement Team), and we pick out a part. For instance,

we will look at bilingual education and ask, "Where are we? Do we think we're going to accomplish this?" We have constant assessment.In December, we did a TAAS pre-test. We got reports on how we did on that pre-test, and we know what we have to do in January. It prettymuch gave us what we were going to do for intersession school. So, it's constant evaluation.

As far as monitoring, we said we would touch many parents, through much communication. Letters [are sent] out by teachers. Oneof our goals was that they do a lot of it. Other people come here and I say I would like to do a parent letter. They say "Oh we don't sendthem home, they're not going to read them." I say, "You know what? Send them anyway." Because they do come. And they do read them.No excuses.

A big part of our success is the staff development program that we have come up with. We have evolved, and we have criteria forattending an out-of-toivn trip and attending other staff development. One is that they would just be participating in three voluntarycommittees. And that's tough, but it also makes them eligible for these wonderful staff development activities. To go out of town on aconference is really a reward, and it's a big investment. You want to invest in people who you know are going to come back andgive youso much more. But everybody participates. We have too much to do, we can't afford to let two people do everything. Everybody gets hisor her time to be in the limelight, to do a lot of work, but also to reap the rewards of having completed a good project.

Who came up with the guidelines?We did the SIT committee. They were stricter. If I would have come up with them, I probably would not have said three committees.

I would have said teachers must serve on a volunteer committee. They said it should be at least three committees because everybody cando two. And then they said, when we go to conferences, two or three people should not go to the same session, because how else are wegoing to come back and share? They were pretty strict. We have evolved to that. We have learned ways to communicate and be effective.Just like the philosophy that we are going to do a shared decision process, that does not mean that it comes to me it goes to a team. Andthen in turn, the team doesn't make all the decisions without getting input from other people. This has been a very good way to communicate.

You talked about zero-based budgeting. If it were just up to you and you could do the first thing on the priority list, what would it be?I would secure good personnel. What I have found is that you get good people to support whatever you want to do for students. That's

what you should invest your money in. You don't need to buy computers, you don't need to buy programs, you need good people. Ourdistrict has a policy that is "last one in, first one out." So if we lose any teachers, they're going to be the last ones that our committeesrecommended to be here. They're excellent teachers! So I would secure the good personnel and find a way to keep everybody here. I thinkthat those new people who are here do everything to make their classrooms successful.

So what do you do to make sure you get good personnel? How does that happen?The last couple ofyears, we've been solely responsible for recommending people who come to work in our school. We had a vacancy

last year for a third grade monolingual position. We put together teachers from the third grade level that were going to have to be workingwith this person. I was on the committee, and we had a parent from third grade. We interviewed five people. Oddly enough, all of usrecommended this person who came here.

A lot of our teacher interview questions deal with the affective domain: "How would you deal with the situation of your childrenwho couldn't read? How do you handle children who can't speak English and they're in your classroom, whether it's bilingual or not?"It doesn't have to do very much with how well you're prepared. It has to do with how you would deal with the kids.

Give me an example of an interview question.What do you think causes discipline problems? Some teachers said it's a lack of responsibility at home, but I think it's really not.

This young man that we hired said, "Well, you know, the kids are bored! If I'm not entertaining them and doing a good job in keepingthem involved, I think there's going to be some trouble." If someone says, "They're not interested," then I know that I have someone whois going to provide instruction to the student.

Another question is, "What is your feeling on parental involvement?" They say, "It's very important," and [thus] they say the rightanswer. Then we say "What would you do to make sure that parents are involved in your classroom?" Many of them are brand new [to

The Whole School - continued on page 13

January 1997 IDRA Newsletter

IS EDUCATIONAL EQUITY BEING

ACHIEVED IN YOUR PROGRAM?

1. Do all students have access toschools, courses and programs in anon-discriminatory manner?

2. Are the educational interventions,including instruction, curriculum,materials and support, structured torespond to the varyingcharacteristics of diverse learners?

3. To what degree do these educationalinterventions represent the best ofwhat is known from current researchabout achievement and equity asthey relate to minority, poor, femaleand specialneeds students?

4. Do these interventions take a "non-deficit" approach to the varyingcharacteristics of learners?

5. Are the educational interventionstruly student-centered or are theyteacher- and/or system-centered?

6. Are the educational interventionssupported by the resourcesnecessary to provide the strongestimpact, in a way that ispedagogically appropriate, for thosewho are farthest away from thedesired standards of excellence?

7. Do the educational interventionsproduce comparable academic andother school outcomes forpopulations of learners of differentcharacteristics, including race,ethnicity, language, economic level,gender and special needs?

8. Can learners of differingcharacteristics perform- atcomparably high levels ofcompetency on appropriatemeasures and assessments as a resultof the educational interventionsprovided?

9. If different learners are notperforming comparably wellacademically, has a strategy beendeveloped and implemented tocorrect the systemic instructionaldeficiency?

10. What is the evidence that alleducational interventions areprovided in a context of respect,high regard, positive expectationfor success and a sense of valuingof the differing characteristics ofdiverse learners?

Bradley Scott, IDRA

A Different Kind of Will- continued from page 5

comparability (Network of RegionalDesegregation Assistance Centers, 1989).

In the January 1995 issue of the IDRA

Newsletter, I proposed that anew generationofdesegregation, civil rights and equity wasemerging. I called it thefourth generation of

desegregation (see box on page 4). The goalwas to create new schools that work fordiverse students, producing world-classstudents with world-class skills and to createnew paradigms for civil rights and equity-based excellence. 1also listed some concernsupon which this new era seemed to befocused. I suggested then that the discussionwas just beginning. In truth, no one had anyidea of how new the discussion was or howcomplex it would become.

The Elementary and SecondaryEducationAct, as amended by theImprovingAmerica's School Act of 1994, now has asits focus five major themes the following:1. High standards for allstudents. with the

elements of education aligned so thateverything is working together to help allstudents reach those standards.

2. A focus on teaching and learning.3. Partnerships among families,

communities and schools that supportstudent achievement to high standards.

4. Flexibility to stimulate local-based anddistrict initiative, coupled withresponsibility for student performance.

5. Resources targeted to areas of greatestneeds, in amounts sufficient to make adifference [emphasis added] (U.S.Department of Education, 1996).

In short, themes one, two and fourspeak to excellence regarding academicoutcomes. Theme five concerns equity,allocating resources in varying ways to meetthe educational needs of different learnersin order to produce students who all reachhigh standards.

In answer to the question, Who isresponsible for these equitable outcomes?,theme three suggests that everyone isresponsible "families, communities andschools." The success of all students iseveryone's responsibility. The federalgovernment is saying to local communities,Do what you will, use your own initiative tomove all students to high standards, butmove all students to higher standards.

In the final analysis, all of the schoolreform efforts in the nation will do little tono good unless all students benefit from thechanges that occur. Only school reformdriven by a notion of equity and measuredby the standards of equity can be deemed

effective in assuring that all students have afair, comparable opportunity to learn, toachieve and to excel. The answers to thequestions in the box at left will determine ifeducational equity is being achieved, oreven approached.

The degree to which schools anddistricts can answer these questionsaffirmatively and offer hard evidence throughthe comparably high outcomes and resultsin student achievement, is the degree towhich those schools and districts can saythat they are truly excellent because they areproducing equitable outcomes for allstudents. Clearly this era of school reformand high achievement ofstandards is callingfor equity-based excellence. Nothing elsewill do. The twenty-first century can tolerateno less.

Resources

Cardenas, J.A. Multicultural Education: A Generationof Advocacy. (Needham Heights, Mass.: Simon &Schuster Custom Publishing, 1995), pp. 501-530.

Cardenas, J.A. "Widening, Not Narrowing the Gap."In S. Halperin (Ed.), Voices from the Field: 30Expert Opinions of America 1000, the BushAdministration Strategy to 'Reinvent' America'sSchools. (Washington, D.C.: William T. GrantFoundation Commission on Work, Family, andCitizenship and Institute for EducationalLeadership, 1991), pp. 28-29.

Keating, P. and J. Oakes. Access to Knowledge:Removing School Barriers to Learning. (Denver,Colo.: The Education Commission of the States,1988).

Lee, V.E., and J.B. Smith. Effects ofHigh Restructuringand Size on Gains in Achievement and Engagementfor Early Secondary School Students. (Madison,Wisc.: Wisconsin Center for Education Research,University of Wisconsin and the Center onOrganization and Restructuring of Schools, 1994).

McKenzie, F.D. "Equity: A Call to Action." In R.S.Brandt (Ed.), Challenges and Achievements ofAmerican Education. (Alexandria, Va.:Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment, 1993), pp. 9-18.

National Coalition of Advocates for Students."Introduction," The Good Common School.(Boston, Mass.: The Eusey Press, 1991), pp. 3-9.

Network of Regional Desegregation AssistanceCenters. Resegregation of Public Schools: TheThird Generation. (Portland, Ore.: NorthwestRegional Educational Laboratory, 1989), pp. 1-19 .

Scott, B. "The Fourth Generation of Desegregationand Civil Rights," IDRA Newsletter (San Antonio,Texas: Intercultural Development ResearchAssociation, January 1995), pp. 3, 6, 11 and 20.

U.S. Department of Education. Companion Document:Cross-Cutting Guidance for the Elementary andSecondary Education Act. (Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of Education, September 1996).

Bradley Scott directs the IDRADesegregation Assistance Center.Comments and questions may be sent to him

via E-mail at bscott @idra.org.

January 1997 ra IDRA Newsletter 15

Schooiwide Projects - continued from page 2

schools in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.Their findings are organized aroundseveral themes: school-communitycollaborations, educational resources andoutcomes, writing instruction forlinguistically diverse students,psychoeducational assessment oflinguistically diverse students, speech-language assessment, effectivegovernance and administrative supportpatterns, and best practices (Reyes andScribner, 1995).Dr. Jose A. Cardenas proposes a "theoryof incompatibilities" thatcomprehensively affects the quality ofeducational programs for LEP students(1995). Since then, other researchfindings have supported this "theory ofincompatibilities."

A recent newsletter on issues in schoolreform published by the U.S. Departmentof Education indicates that fourcharacteristics were common in effectiveschoolwide programs (see box on page6): driven by vigorous standards, offeringa high-quality curriculum,comprehensively planned and results-oriented (U.S. Department of Education,1996).

Effective Schoolwide Reform Indicatorsfor Campuses with LEP Students

With the Pechman and Fiester findingsas a framework for schoolwide reform alongwith other related research, four indicatorsemerge that are central to effective schoolsfor LEP students. These four indicators arefurther defined with program features thatcreate opportunities for LEP students to

succeed academically.

Rigorous StandardsSuccessful campuses for LEP students

have the perception that LEP students canand will learn just like other students. Aperception to the contrary is a big obstaclethat impairs or diminishes the impact of anyschoolwide reform effort.

Standards are measures ofaccomplishment that reflect the school'scommitment to rigor and hard work tochallenge all students to high levels ofachievement. They are the criteria used toassess program implementation efforts andresults. Schools establish standards foroverall performance, student performance,teacher performance and operatingprocedures. Effective schools for LEP

Schoolwide Projects - continued on page 12

,,-..r.ACTIVITIESHIGHLIGHTS OF RECENT IDRA

In November, IDRA worked with 5,836teachers, administrators and parents ONthrough 70 training and technical assis-tance activities and 82 program sites innine states plus the United Kingdom. . MI illtrA104'Topics included: -1.1,,,, ,

Effective Outreach with ,. Me* )Parents

..-w"Tiik,

+ Weaving TAAS Instruction .

into the Regular Program ,..; -, . .

+ Indicators of Successful ,?,, ,/,; .f.;

'' Vt.&

Instructional Programs in Math v,

'

and Science (video conference) ., ,

n+ Community Leadership for

Standards Based ReformRacial Harassment

..

.1

room Wes

c:- -7".,

..... 04

Participating agencies and schooldistricts included: IDRA staff provides services to: Services include:

.1. El Paso ISD, Texas + public school teachers 0 training and technical assistance

.0. U.S. Department of Education + parents 0 evaluation

.0. Jefferson Parish, Louisiana + administrators 0 serving as expert witnesses in policy0 Muskogee Public Schools, + other decision-makers in settings and court cases

Oklahoma public education . -O. publishing research and professional-0. Farmers Branch City Council, papers, books, videos and curricula.

Texas

Activity SnapshotIDRA was selected by the U.S. Department of Education to evaluate the national Improving America's Schools Conference inSt. Louis, Atlanta and San Francisco. IDRA designed scannable evaluation forms with input from key stakeholders. Thisevaluation had a response of 28 percent compared to 5 percent the previous year. IDRA generated quick and comprehensiveevaluation results including debriefing of conference planners. The conclusions have already informed and influenced thedecision-making process for next year's conference.

For information on 1DRA services for your school district or other group, contact 1DRA at 210/684-8180.

January 1997 ra IDRA16

Newsletter

Schoolwide Projects - continued from page 11

students are characterized by the following.Standards:

Conform to high expectations for LEPstudents.Are established by key stakeholders andinclude parents of LEP students.Are rigorous for all students.Guide the design and implementation ofan educational program that integratesand addresses the needs of all students,including LEP students.Are used to monitor the pace and qualityof progress.Define a time frame for theaccomplishment of goals.Are used to establish measures of successfor all key stakeholders, including parentsof LEP students.Define the organization as pro-active,adaptable and flexible.Define leadership expectations.

High Quality CurriculumSchools that are effective for LEP

students have a flexible, high qualitycurriculum that has been designedspecifically to address the needs of aparticular campus. These schools useresearch to identify strategies that haveproven to be effective with LEP students.They study this research, select strategiesand adjust them to conform to thecharacteristics and needs of the campus.

These schools do not have a programfor LEP students as an addendum to aninstructional program on the campus.Instead, the program adjustmentsimplemented to meet the needs of LEPstudents are an integral part of the regularcurriculum. LEP students are not segregatedand identifiable as a special group amongteachers and students. They are an integralpart of the entire school organization. Theybelong to school families, villages or learningcommunities. They do not form one learningcommunity or village, but rather belong toseveral different ones. They are consistentlyassessed and monitored to ensure thatprogress is made at an appropriate pace.

Teachers of LEP students are notisolated; they experience a sense ofbelonging. They do not plan separately. Ifplanning by grade level, they are an integralpart of the grade-level team. They are risk-takers and experiment with new ideas. Beingpro-active and innovative are characteristicsof teachers of LEP students. The "healthy"school culture promotes and rewards thistype of behavior. They are action researchers

who monitor their actions and their impacton student achievement. They take fullresponsibility for the achievement of allstudents and never blame students or parentsfor achievement shortcomings. They do notmake excuses.

Teachers of LEP students as well asthe entire school staff of all teachers,counselors, secretaries, cafeteria staff andadministrators value and acknowledge thelinguistic and cultural background of adiverse student population. In most effective"healthy" schools, the teachers seek to refineand upgrade their teaching skills periodicallythrough university training or in-servicetraining provided through the school incollaboration with federal and state-fundedtechnical assistance and training centers.

All teachers on the campus considerstudents' families as an integral part of thelearning and teaching community. Theyarticulate this feeling to parents anddemonstrate it through meaningfulinteractions. Parents take part in setting goalsand defining standards, and they set standardsfor their own performance as partners in theeducational endeavor.

Furthermore, a high quality curriculumis guided by the following additionalindicators:

Decisions emerge from a comprehensiveneeds assessment that embodies theessence of student diversity.Needs assessment is ongoing and is not aspecific event that happens only duringthe summer or at the beginning of theschool year.Continuous student assessments in coreareas of literacy development,mathematics, science and social studiesare used to adjust instruction periodically.Curriculum and instruction decisions arecomplemented by a conducive schoolclimate and environment that considersLEP students as central to its mission.Educational improvement plans are theresult of teachers, parents andadministrators collectively andcollaboratively making decisions andplanning.Decisions reflect a recognition of whatwe know about language acquisition andtransferability of knowledge acrosslanguages.Curriculum and instruction are carefullyplanned, are multidimensional andprovide learning opportunities that caterto a variety oflearning styles and languageproficiency levels.Administrators and teachers are LEP

student advocates. They have highexpectations and establish high standardsof student achievement.

Coordinated Federal ResourcesEffective schools leverage federal

funds and plan their use carefully to ensurethe integrity of their intent and purpose.Administrators have a global picture of howdifferent variables affect the quality ofeducation provided to a target population.These administrators and teachers extendthe use of the funds school-wide to includethose factors that need attention andcontribute to the needs of the targetpopulation. These funds are treated assupplemental to local funds, and theirflexibility is evidenced in their allocationsto different activities that not only benefitthe target population but also the wholestudent population. At no time are federalfunds allocated without substantialjustification as to how the target populationwill benefit. Federal funds are never used sothat local funding can be redirected orchanneled to other unrelated areas.

In effective schools, teachers andadministrators are always cognizant of thelocal responsibility, both fiscally andprogrammatically, for the improvement ofthe target population's achievement. Federalfunding provides the resources and theimpetus to address the needs in an evenmore comprehensive manner. Effective"healthy" schools think and act in thefollowing manner:

Use federal resources as supplemental.Operate from an improvement plan thatdefines the strategies and initiatives toaddress all students' needs.Use federal resources to supplement localfunds earmarked to support theimprovement plan.Monitor and evaluate progress in areasof need supported by federal resources.Articulate clearly how federal funds are.having an impact on areas supported byfederal legislation.

Goals and Results OrientationEffective schools for LEP students

have specific student performance goalsand check results periodically to ensure thatprogress is being made at an adequate pace.They ensure that gaps do not exist amongdifferent student populations. They have asystem of evaluation that periodicallyprovides them with critical information toadjust instruction accordingly.

Schoolwide Projects - continued on page 13

January 1997 12 IDRA Newsletter 17

Schoolwide Projects - continued from page 12

In summary, effective schools for allchildren review achievement data and usethat data to guide the planning of initiativesdirected at improving the achievement ofthe whole school. Effective schools for allchildren recognize the demands of a diversestudent population and plan accordingly.Effective schools for allchildren use researchas a basis for creating the climate andenvironment for improved achievement.

Effective schools form meaningfulpartnerships with families, the communityand the business sector. They establish highstandards and reach them. They also leveragefederal funds to increase their impact.Overall, the whole school shares a beliefthat success is attainable and that the schoolcan make a positive difference in the lives ofall students. Doing so, helps to sustain goodhealth, which, after all, creates limitlesspossibilities for all students.

ResourcesAugust, D. and K. Hakuta, F. Olguin, D. Pompa. LEP

Students and Title I: A Guidebook for Educators.(Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University, 1995).

Cardenas, J. A. Multicultural Education: A Generationof Advocacy. (Needham Heights, Mass.: Simon &Schuster Custom Publishing, 1995).

Federal Register. (Thursday, September 21, 1995)Vol. 60, No. 183.

Garcia, E.E. "Effective Schooling for LanguageMinority Students, New Focus, NCBE OccasionalPapers in Bilingual Education, No. I. (Wheaton,Maryland: National Clearinghouse for BilingualEducation, 1987).

Lein, L. and J.F. Johnson, M. Ragland. SuccessfulTexas Schoolwide Programs: Research StudyResults. (Austin, Texas: Charles A. Dana Center atthe University of Texas at Austin, October 1996).

McLeod, B. Educating Students from DiverseLinguistic and Cultural Backgrounds. (Santa Cruz,Calif.: The Bilingual Research Center, intemetposting, 1996).

Pechman, E. and L. Fiester. An Idea Book:Implementing Schoolwide Projects. (Washington,D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Planningand Evaluation Service, 1994).

Reyes, P. and J.D. Scribner. Effective Border SchoolsResearch and Development Initiative. (Edinburg,Texas: Education Service Center, Region I, 1995).

Stringfield, S. and M.A. Millsap, E. Scott, R. Herman.The Three-Year Effects of 10 Promising Programson the Academic Achievement of Students PickedAt-risk. (Baltimore, Maryland: The John HopkinsUniversity, 1996).

U.S. Department of Education. Improving America'sSchools: A Newsletter on Issues in School Reform,working document. (Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education, October 1996).

Villarreal, A. "Site-based Decision Making: CraftingEducational Excellence for Limited-English-Proficient Students," Compendium of Readings inBilingual Education. (San Antonio, Texas: TexasAssociation for Bilingual Education, 1994).

Dr. Abelardo Villarreal is the division director of theIDRA Division of Professional Development.Comments and questions may be sent to him via E-mail at avillarl@idra.org.

Intercultural Development Research Association

The Fourth AnnualIDRA 5.40.44.4 eieiN44t Educator's InstituteTM

-;(fr

Come and open new windows (Weaving Innovative Notions and Diverse Opportimitiesfor Wee Scholars). These windows will open to areas such as:

Children's literature, with an emphasis on diversitySchool restructuring, considering strategies that havebeen proven to improve literacyInstructional strategies in the areas of mathematics,science, play and technologyParental involvement with sessions designed for parentsand parent liaisons at the campus and district levels.

April. 22-24, 1997 Fiesta WeekThe Week of the Young Child

Join early childhood education experts and colleagues as we open a wider window ofopportunity for all young children!

Registration fee (by March 31): 5150Late registration fee (after March 31): $175Single day registration fee: $75

Hotel: Omni San Antonio Hotel. Reserve your room by March 21 for special rates(210/691-8888). (IDRA cannot make your hotel reservations.Please contact the hotel directly.)

For more information contact Hilaria Bauer or Carol Chavez at IDRA, 210/684-8180.

The Whole School - continued from page 9

teaching], and they say "Well, I would sendletters home." Right away you know thatperson is headed toward the right direction.It deals with a lot of what we're wanting todo. The people that work with you areeverything, because they've got to be goodwhen you're not there.

So have you had a situation where you havea teacher whose heart is in the right place,but just isn't good at teaching reading orisn't good at teaching math? And what doyou do in that situation?

We had one that just was not a verygood math teacher. Consistently those scoreswere pretty low. Honesty is the best policy:"You know [so and so], your scores don'tseem to . . ." "I know, I just can't seem to dothis." "Well, you're very good in reading.Why don't you and your neighbor teamteach." And we were able to help her in thatway. Teaching a specific content area hasnot been the problem. A problem I have seenwith very good teachers with a good heartand know how to teach has been classroommanagement. They just are so kindheartedthat the kids are just all over the place.

When kids come here because of adiscipline problem, they're embarrassedbecause they don't want to come to theoffice because they've lost their temper andthey kicked each other and they're here. Butfor the most part, we do not have manydiscipline problems. And on occasions whenwe have had discipline problems, somethingnot right has been going on in the classroom.I bet you that 90 percent of the time whenI've had kids here, it's because they've beeninvolved in something physical. The teacheris busy doing something and really notsupervising their kids. So I know thatdiscipline problems can be prevented.

Our kids that leave Hueco and go toSanchez are praised because they have verygood behavior. I think it's important. We'vegot to prepare them to be good members ofsociety. So when the schoolwide programconcept came along, we said that's for us,because [it's for] the whole school, the wholechild, the whole family.

Reprinted with permission. For a copy of thereport, Successful Texas Schoolwide Programs,contact the Charles A. Dana Center at 512/471-6190.

January 1997 ra IDRAnvsletter

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

TEXAS SCHOOL FINANCE REFORM

BY DR. Jost A. CARDENAS

PUBLICATION ORDER FORM

This 28-year history ofschoolfinance reform in Texas will he distributed exclusively by IDRA (see next page). A limited number of copies

are to be printed. Orders are now being accepted at thepre-publication price of $25, including shipping and handling.

To reserve your copy, send this orderform and a check or purchase order (if applicable) for $25 to IDRA. 5835 Callaghan Road, Suite

350, San Antonio, Texas 78228; 210/684-8180; fax 210/684-5389. Make sure to include this form when ordering.

SHIP TO:BILL TO:

NAME:NAME:

AGENCY OR SCHOOL DISTRICT:AGENCY OR SCHOOL DISTRICT:

ADDRESS:ADDRESS:

CITY: STATE: ZIP:

PHONE: ( )

WOULD YOU LIKE THE AUTHOR TO AUTOGRAPH YOUR BOOK? IF YES, WHO SHOULD

HE ADDRESS IT 70?

MINI1001=le

Crry: STATE: ZIP:

PHONE: ( )

PURCHASE ORDER #:(if applicable)

Number of copies (S25 each): Total cost: $

IDRA's Project FLAIR - continued from page 7

teacher aides, other school staff membersand parents. Teachers expand theirknowledge base about schoolwide programsand pedagogy related to achievement ofhigh standards. Parents become empoweredand are part of the decision-making processin the project. Parents are seen as an asset inthe process. School strategies for attainingand retaining parent involvement areessential. In order for many parents to getinvolved in their children's education, theymust assume new leadership roles. Theymust practice making decisions, not simplybe told "how to." They must serve onplanning and other policy-makingcommittees. 'The more informed andinvolved parents are, the more they tend toget involved in the education of theirchildren.

Teacher participation in makingassessment and instructional decisions.The involvement of the teachers in theassessment process is essential. ProjectFLAIR understands that trust must not beviolated, and information gathered throughthe assessment should be seen in the contextof the program design rather than as anegative perception of the school. This canonly intensify teachers' ownership of themission and the effectiveness ofthe program.

lntensiveassistance to students who

experience difficulty mastering statestandards. First and foremost should betheimparting ofhigh expectations to all students.

It may be necessary to customize servicesfor students with very special needs.Although pull-out programs and remedialapproaches should be minimized,supplementary instruction may be the answerin meeting the needs of some students for

attaining specific goals.Evaluation data for decision

making. Formative and summativeevaluation services are provided by IDRAto all participants. IDRA provides anannual

report summarizing the quantitative andqualitative results to the central office andeach principal.

Role of the principal in the process.One ofthe major challenges to implementinga schoolwide program is changing from a'mass audience" approach to one ofteaching

each child. It is the principal whoseleadership and management is key to the

success of a schoolwide program. In anattempt to make the transition a little easier,

in Project FLAIR, principals work with aplanning committee that in turn examinesprograms that create collaboration.

This model has worked by creatinglearning environments that promoteacademic achievement gains by empoweringadministrators, teachers and students with

COMING Up!In February, the IDRA Newsletter

'focuses on standardsand assessment.

strategies to improve reading instructionand by building capacity in the school districtor campus to initiate and sustain change thathas a positive impact. This model works forall campuses, regardless of studentpopulation profile or past academicperformance level. In IDRA's ProjectFLAIR everybody wins teachers,administrators, students and parents.

School districts and campuses can obtainadditional information about IDRA's ProjectFLAIR by contacting Dr. Rogelio Lopez delBosque at 210/684-8180.

ResourcesCharles A. Dana Center. Successful Texas Schoolwide

Programs: Research Study Results. (Austin, Texas:Charles A. Dana Center at the University of Texas

at Austin, October 1996).U.S. Department of Education. Improving America's

Schools: A Newsletter on Issues in School Reform,working document. (Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Education, October 1996).

Rogelio Lopez del Bosque, Ed.D. is the coordinatorfor the IDRA Division of Professional Development.Comments and questions may be sent to him via E-mail at rlopez@idra.org.

BEST COPY AVAiLABLE-januarY 1997 14 IDRA Newsletter 19

An)

Dr. Jose A. Cardenas, founder and director emeritus of IDRA, has completed a new book on the 28-year historyof school finance in Texas. The new publication, Texas School Finance Reform: An IDRA Perspective, is currently inproduction and will be ready for distribution early in 1997.

"Jose is the best qualified person to author this history of school finance reform," said Dr.. Maria RobledoMontecel, executive director of IDRA. "He is the only person who has been actively involved in the entire school financereform effort since the early days of the Rodriguez vs. San Antonio ISD litigation, when he was superintendent of theEdgewood Independent School District, to the present post-Edgewood legislation."

Following the U.S. Supreme Court reversal of the Rodriguez decision that found the Texas system of schoolfinance unconstitutional in 1973, Dr. Cardenas resigned from Edgewood to establish a non-profit organization toadvocate for school finance reform. The original organization, Texans for Educational Excellence (TEE), re-,incorporated in 1974 as the Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA). Staff from the organizationparticipated in each reform study group, attended each session of the Texas Legislature and provided researchdata and testimony during litigation in the state courts. Dr. Cardenas also served as co-master for the court inthe design of an equitable system to be used if the legislature failed to enact one.

Judging by the number of inquiries received at IDRA, historians, sociologists, political scientists andeducators have a strong interest concerning the who, what, when and how of the Texas school reform.

Unfortunately, there is little public information. available on the catalytic forces responsible for the reforni"In the absence of accurate information, a substantial amount of erroneous information is surfacing concerning

actors and roles during the period of reform," said Cardenas. "Persons who performed trivial roles are being credited withleadership roles; persons who made substantial contributions are being ignored."

The author's recollections, impressions and opinions are strongly substantiated by an IDRA collection of documentscompiled during the entire 28-year period. IDRA hopes that this information will be useful not only for historical purposes,but also that it will provide a blueprint for persons interested in bringing about future reform in schools and other socialinstitutions.

This 28-year history of school .finance reform in Texas will be distributed exclusively by IDRA. A limited numberof copies are to, be printed. Orders are now being accepted at the pre-publication price of $25, including shipping andhandling. See order form on page 14.

Contents

Foreword: by Dr. James A. Kelly, president,National Board of Professional TeachingStandards

1: The Texas System: '1950 to 19732: Rodriguez vs. San Antonio ISD3: Post Rodriguez: 1973 to 19854: State Legislation: 1973 to 19845: Bilingual Education Funding6: Property Tax Equity: 1973 to 19957: The Perot Committee and House Bill

728: The Edgewood Litigation9: Senate Bill 1 and Edgewood II

10: Senate Bill 351 and Edgewood 11111: Aftermath, Senate Bill 7 and

Edgewood IV12: The Status and Future of School

Finance Reform

The text is augmented by a bibliographyincluding 159 references on school financeand a listing of 142 court case citations.The index includes page locations for 280individuals; 157 organizations, agenciesand institutions; 62 legislative bills; 88court eases; and 274 school finance topicsmentioned in the 12 chapters.

SELECTED QUOTES FROM THE BOOK

School Finance Reform"In retrospect, I can only say that I'm grateful that nobody was opposed to the equitable system since it took 22 additionalyears, including 10 years of additional litigation: to achieve an only partially equitable system. If there had been realopposition, it may have taken several hundred years to get there."

"Low-wealth school districts may have a problem with a program that provides resources on the basis of gains, when themajor impediment to making gains is the lack of resources."

The Edgewood Schools"The students had drawn typewriter keyboards on pieces of cardboard and were practicing their typing on non-existingtypewriters, their fingers hitting the place in the cardboard where the letters were depicted."

School Finance Study Groups"Projections for other low-wealth districts did not look too promising, but the blue ribbon panel, in its infinite wisdom, addeda 'hold harmless' provision. This thoughtful provision prevents poor school districts from receiving less state aid in the firstyear of implementation than they received before the reform recommendations."

Taxation"California tax opponent Howard Jarvis gladly came to Texas 'which ranked 49th in tax effort' and provided his experience,expertise and support to a similar effort in this state, an exceptional example of a man with a solution in search of a problem."

"If the legislators allow the courts to close the schools, 3.5 million kids will be sent home. It would be only a matter of daysbefore the Texas electorate would realize that there are worse things in life than taxation."

School Finance Legislation"Gov. Briscoe promptly called two special sessions to deal with property taxation. The first session was followed by a secondsession to correct the mistakes of the first session." a

School Finance Litigation"If one asks what Gov. Dolph Briscoe was thinking concerning Rodriguez in the period between the three judge decisionand the Supreme Court decision (15 months), the closest answer is that he was not."

School Facilities"The findings of the experts [on school facilities needs] were so embarrassing and created such a legal liability for the statethat the study was never released by the governor."

Future Issues"Since the courts and subsequent legislative action have reduced the opportunity for the privileged to attain superioreducational opportunities for their children at the expense of children in other school districts, attempts will be made to attainthe same superior educational opportunities at the expense of other children in the same school district."

BEST COPY AVAIAPILEJanuary 1997 Ng IDRA Newsletter

20

DR. ARTURO MADRID RECEIVES PRESTIGIOUS NEH AWARD

Dr. Arturo Madrid received theCharles Frankel Prize presented by PresidentBill Clinton in a White House ceremony thismonth. This is the highest award bestowedby the National Endowment for theHumanities.

"The arts and humanities are essentialto our growth and renewal as a people," saidPresident Clinton about the honor. "Throughthese awards we commemorate thecontributions of distinguished artists andscholars whose work reflects the strengthand diversity ofAmerica's cultural heritage."

Dr. Madrid, an IDRA board member,was selected for his extraordinarycontributions toward developing theintellectual resources of the Latinocommunity and for pioneering scholarshipon Chicano literary and cultural expression.The Charles Frankel Prize honors individualswho have made outstanding contributionsto the public's understanding of history,literature, philosophy and other humanitiesdisciplines.

In an interview with the AssociatedPress, Dr. Madrid pointed specifically to thework he has done to ensure "that Latinos andother minorities are not overlooked byinstitutions of higher education, bringing tobear the academic and intellectual resourcesof the Hispanic community on American

challenges and, finally, assuring that Latinosparticipate fully in all realms of Americanlife particularly in its artistic, cultural andintellectual arenas."

For more than 30 years, Dr. Madridhas been engaged in professional activitiesand scholarship to ensure Hispanics areinvolved in all institutions of U.S. society.Born in Tierra Maria in northern NewMexico, he has been a professor in themodern languages and literature departmentat Trinity University since 1993. He spentthe nine years prior to that as foundingpresident of the T6mas Rivera Center, anational institute for policy studies on Latinoissues. He is credited with bringing the bestintellectual talent to bear on the challengesfacing the nation's Hispanic population.

He holds the Norine R. and T. FrankMurshinson Distinguished Professor of theHumanities at Trinity and has taught at the*University of Minnesota, the University ofCalifornia at San Diego, and began histeaching career at Dartmouth College.

The NEH award commemoratesCharles Frankel (1917-1979), whose lifeand work exemplified the integration ofscholarship and public service. Other 1996winners are Pulitzer Prize-winning poet andnovelist Rita Dove, author and Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Doris Kearns Goodwin,

Dr. Arturo Madrid

political philosopher and civic activistDonald Kenunis, and commentator andformer press secretary to President JohnsonBill Moyers.

This is the eighth year that the FrankelPrize has been awarded. Past recipientsinclude former CBS correspondent CharlesKuralt, African-American studies scholarJohn Hope Franklin, author Eudora Welty,filmmaker Ken Burns, and Librarian ofCongress Emeritus Daniel J. Boorstin.

J*P'DE VE4

IDRA:P 0t

4t, b-.Cif ASS''

5835 Callaghan Road, Suite 350San Antonio, TX 78228-1190

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

6566 36 245 tttt*AUTOttHIXED ADC 760

ERIC/CRESS

PO BOX 1348

ACQUISITIONS

CHARLESTON WV 25325-1348

21

Non-Profit Organization

U.S. POSTAGE PAID

Permit No. 3192San Antonio, TX 78228

Creating schools that work for all children,through research materials development training technical assistance evaluation information dissemination

(9/92)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

IC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Releaseform (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").