You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.

www.HFRP.org

The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.

Terms of Use ▼

In this section HFRP offers “New and Noteworthy” resources on the evaluation of education reform efforts, including reports, tools, and organizations of interest.

Books, Reports, and Journal Articles
The Annenberg Foundation. (2002). The Annenberg Challenge: Lessons and reflections on public school reform. Providence, RI: Author. This publication outlines the achievements and failures of the Annenberg Challenge’s efforts to improve public education and summarizes its use of intermediary organizations to facilitate large-scale urban reform. www.annenbergchallenge.org

Bloom, H. (2003). Using “short” interrupted time-series analysis to measure the impacts of whole-school reforms: With applications to a study of accelerated schools. Evaluation Review, 27(1), 3–49. This article introduces a new approach for measuring the impacts of whole-school reform, discussing a conceptual rationale, statistical procedures, an explanation for interpreting findings, and strengths and limits of the approach. The approach is illustrated through an evaluation of Accelerated Schools, a major whole-school reform.

Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2002, November). Comprehensive school reform and student achievement: A meta-analysis (Report No. 59). Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk, Johns Hopkins University. This evaluation of Comprehensive School Reform initiatives explores whether these models and their effects on student populations are statistically significant and whether or not there is adequate evidence to identify successful programs. www.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/techReports/Report59.pdf

Center on Education Policy. (2003, January). From the capital to the classroom: State and federal efforts to implement the No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: Author. This report is the “first comprehensive study” on the execution of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The report provides assessment and conclusions and includes a list of “issues to watch” as NCLB continues.

Chatterji, M. (2002, Fall). Models and methods for examining standards-based reforms and accountability initiatives: Have the tools of inquiry answered pressing questions on improving schools? Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 345–386. In this synthesis of research on standards-based reform and accountability, the author concludes that studies have not been systemic in design and are therefore not adequate to help direct schools.

Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (2003). Understanding and using scientific evidence: How to critically evaluate data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. This book outlines the importance of critical analysis of scientific evidence and lays out the principles of scientific investigation so that readers will be better prepared to understand, collect, and explain data. www.sagepub.com/book.aspx?pid=5160

Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. This synthesis of over 50 research studies since 1995 explores the effects of different models of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. www.sedl.org/pubs/catalog/items/fam33.html

Miron, G., & Horn, J. (2002, September). Evaluation of Connecticut charter school and the charter school initiative, final report. Kalamazoo, MI: The Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University. This study contains findings from the evaluation of the charter school initiative in Connecticut. The report contains school-specific data from the operating schools, while focusing on an evaluation of the initiative as a whole. www.wmich.edu/evalctr/charter/ctcharter.html

Nevo, D. (Ed.). (2002). School-based evaluation: An international perspective. Amsterdam, Holland: JAI. This volume discusses the concept of school-based evaluation and presents case studies of school evaluations from across the world. The book advocates for a combination of both internal and external evaluation for the benefit of school accountability and school improvement. www.elsevier.com/inca/publications/store/6/2/4/6/0/4

Pew Forum on Standards-Based Reform. (2002). Miles to go: Reflections on mid-course corrections for standards-based reform. Bethesda, MD: Education Week Press. After 12 years, the Pew Forum on Standards-Based Reform held its final meeting in June of 2002, the result of which is this last collection of short essays on standards-based reform issues. Authors include Deborah McGriff, Sandra Feldman, Linda Darling-Hammond, and Checker Finn, among others. To order call Education Week Press at 800-346-1834.

Quigley, D. D. (2000, November). Parents and teachers working together to support third-grade achievement: Parents as Learning Partners (PLP) findings. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California. This report describes, evaluates, and summarizes findings of one initiative developed to unify parents and teachers in the goal of supporting children’s academic progress. The report focuses on communication, parenting, and learning at home. www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports_set.htm

Evaluation Tools and Resources
The Rhode Island Department of Education’s School Accountability for Learning and Teaching (SALT) survey system measures educational progress of Rhode Island schools. Results of these survey efforts provide an annual representation of school climate, student academic progress, social skills, and parent involvement that can be used to examine education reforms over time. www.infoworks.ride.uri.edu/2002/default.asp

The Annenberg Institute for School Reform’s toolbox for accountability offers practical approaches to gauge the progress of school reform and to improve student achievement. The site includes a “drawer” for surveys and an upcoming drawer on standardized testing.

Organizations of Interest
The Civil Rights Project (CRP) (www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu) at Harvard University is a leading organization devoted to civil rights research, focusing on diverse aspects of K–16 education reform including: bilingual education, resegregation trends, benefits of racial diversity on education, dropout tendencies and remedies, impacts of Title I reforms on minority children, high-stakes testing, and racial disparities in school discipline and special education. Some of CPR’s most recent work related to K–12 education includes:

  • Frankenberg, E., Chungmei, L., & Orfield, G. (2003, January). A multiracial society with segregated schools: Are we losing the dream? Cambridge, MA: Civil Rights Project. This study focuses on national resegregation trends in American public schools and highlights patterns of racial enrollment and segregation at all levels of public schools (national, regional, state, and district). www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/reseg03/reseg03_full.php
  • Ma, J. (2002, June) What works for the children? What we know and don’t know about bilingual education. Cambridge, MA: Civil Rights Project. This paper weighs evidence to consider whether English immersion programs in California have improved education for English language learners. www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/bilingual02/bilingual_paper02.php
  • Civil Rights Project. (2002, June). Racial inequity in special education: Executive summary for federal policy makers. Cambridge, MA: Author. This study highlights how inappropriate practices in both general and special education classrooms have resulted in overrepresentation, misclassification, and hardship for minority students, particularly black children. www.civilrightsproject.harvard.edu/research/specialed/IDEA_paper02.php

The Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) (www.cpre.org) unites researchers from leading research institutions in an effort to improve elementary and secondary education through practical research. CPRE is currently examining how alternative approaches to reform—such as instructional improvement, new accountability policies, teacher compensation, and whole school reform approach—address issues of coherence, incentive, and capacity. Some of CPRE’s recent work includes:

  • Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (2003, March). Systemic reform in practice: Merck Institute for Science Education. Philadelphia, PA: Author. This publication describes the implementation and impact of the Merck Institute for Science Education (MISE) program, in which MISE partnered with four school districts to improve teaching and learning in science. www.cpre.org/Publications/mise.pdf
  • Tighe, E., Wang, A., & Foley, E. (2002, February). An analysis of the effect of Children Achieving on student achievement in Philadelphia elementary schools. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. This report evaluates the Children Achieving Challenge, a systemic reform initiative in Philadelphia’s public schools. www.cpre.org/Publications/children06.pdf
  • Evaluation of Title I accountability systems and school improvement efforts (TASSIE). (forthcoming). A five-year evaluation of Title I accountability systems, conducted by SRI and CPRE. To review the project’s goals and study design and track the progress of the effort, go to www.tassieonline.org/index.html.

Margaret Caspe, Consultant, HFRP

Emily Shepard, Office Manager, HFRP

‹ Previous Article

© 2016 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College
Published by Harvard Family Research Project