Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeThis study aims to explore the extent to which schools principals serving disadvantaged communities in Germany are able to set appropriate goals and choose suitable measures for improving their schools according to the specific challenges they face. The authors determine whether principals are able to identify their schools' challenges or whether they merely follow “universal recipes” of the school effectiveness research paradigm regardless of their particular school context. This effectiveness-driven accountability approach requires an in-depth evaluation of the school and its stakeholders and might lead to a new attitude toward failure that sees it as an essential part of developing effective school improvement plans.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted descriptive and correlative analyses as well as exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses using longitudinal data of 164 school principals. Through cross-sectional analyses, the authors investigated the connection among challenges, goals and measures and how they correlated with (self-reported) improvements.FindingsFrom a leadership perspective, priorities for school improvement should be aligned with the school-specific challenges they identify and the goals they set to address them.Research limitations/implicationsThe extent to which legislation concerning individual school quality development programs can translate into feasible and effective actions is unclear. Caution should be taken when interpreting the findings of this study, as they reflect school principals' self-selected evaluation measures and therefore might be biased.Practical implicationsIn future research, emphasis should be placed on school management processes, in particular, the development of strategic decision-making, structuring of target perspectives and derivation of steps in school improvement and instructional development. The authors recommend the government offer school principals appropriate and adequate training and support services to prevent them from overburdening their staff.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to a deeper understanding of processes concerning strategic leadership, as opposed to operative management, of schools by revealing context-sensitive considerations.

There is a consensus that the national curriculum cannot be implemented in its original form in local context. Adaptations are made in curriculum due to factors such as school and classroom context, student characteristics and needs, teacher’s professional competence and characteristics. This study aims to investigate the curriculum adaptation efforts of teachers working in socio-economically disadvantaged secondary schools. This study utilized a phenomenological inquiry. The participants, who were selected using criterion sampling method, included the voluntary eight female teachers who worked in socio-economically disadvantaged secondary schools. Data were collected through standardized open-ended interviews and were analyzed using the inductive content analysis method. This study indicated four main findings: a) Students’ family structure is the main factor determining disadvantageousness in socio-economically disadvantaged secondary schools. b) Student and family characteristics, curriculum and curriculum materials are the factors that frequently prevent fidelity to curriculum. c) Teachers made adaptations such as reorganizing, supplementing, omitting/delaying, completing and reducing/simplification. d) In the adaptation process, teachers were found to experience difficulties associated with planning the instruction process and organizing and presenting the content. They were found to cope with these difficulties by benefitting from their postgraduate education experiences, collaboration with colleagues, and internet sources. The findings are discussed in terms of education and curriculum implementation.

This study analyses the functioning of a school as a social system in an atypical context with the purpose of generating propositions to tackle educational problems confronted by socially and economically disadvantaged groups attending these schools. Adopting the constructivist grounded theory, the analysis suggests that there is a kind of “vicious cycle” in the functioning of this atypical school, which adversely affects the school system. Breaking the vicious cycle involves five basic propositions: (1) making school a better place than students’ homes, (2) overcoming the enduring difficulties of working in an atypical school, (3) multiplying learning opportunities, (4) prompting parents to assume more responsibility, (5) locating leadership that makes a difference. These propositions clarify the significance of informal subsystems, school community and the wider environment along with their enabling and blocking effects on a disadvantaged school system. Parallel to other studies on disadvantaged schools, the study highlights the need to refine the orthodox view of the concept of formal education and school, as well as the role of school principal, teachers and parents affiliated with atypical schools.

In this article, the author examines how school-and district-level racial/ethnic and socioeconomic compositions influence schools' use of different types of criminalized and medicalized school discipline. Using a large data set containing information on over 60,000 schools in over 6,000 districts, the authors uses multilevel modeling and a group-mean modeling strategy to answer several important questions about school discipline. First, how do school-and district-level racial and ethnic compositions influence criminalized school discipline and medicalization? Second, how do levels of school and district economic disadvantage influence criminalized school discipline and medicalization? Third, how does district-level economic disadvantage moderate the relationship between school racial/ethnic composition and criminalized school discipline and medicalization? The results generally support hypotheses that schools and districts with relatively larger minority and poor populations are more likely to implement criminalized disciplinary policies, including suspensions and expulsion or police referrals or arrests, and less likely to medicalize students through behavioral plans put in place through laws such as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. However, results from cross-level interaction models suggest that district-level economic disadvantage moderates the influence of school racial composition on criminalized school discipline and medicalization.

Using panel data from a census of public school students in the state of Florida, the authors examine the associations between students' high school course-taking in various subjects and their 10th-grade test scores, high school graduation, entry into postsecondary institutions, and postsecondary performance. The authors use propensity score matching (based on 8thgrade test scores, other student characteristics, and school effects) within groups of students matched on the composition of the students' course-taking in other subjects to estimate the differences in outcomes for students who take rigorous courses in a variety of subjects. The authors find substantial significant differences in outcomes for those who take rigorous courses, and these estimated effects are often larger for disadvantaged youth and students attending disadvantaged schools.

Purpose Increased school autonomy and accountability have been a common denominator of national reforms in otherwise heterogeneous governance systems in Europe and the USA. The paper argues that because schools serving disadvantaged communities (SSDCs) often have lower average performance, they are more often sanctioned or under closer scrutiny, but might also receive more additional resources. The purpose of this paper is to therefore analyze whether SSDCs have more or less autonomy than schools with a more advantageous context in four countries with heterogeneous autonomy and accountability policies. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on the data from the Programme for International Student Assessment 2012 school and student questionnaires from Finland, Germany, the UK, and the USA. The choice of countries is based on different governance models described by Glatter et al. (2003). The data are used to identify SSDCs and analyze the reported autonomy in resource allocation and curriculum and assessment. Using regression analyses, patterns are analyzed for each country individually. They are then juxtaposed and compared. Differences are related back to the governance models of the respective countries. Findings The results indicate an association between the communities the schools are serving and the autonomy either in the allocation of resources, or the curriculum and assessment. SSDCs appeared to have a little more autonomy than schools with a more advantageous context in Finland, Germany, and the UK, but less autonomy in the USA. The comparison suggests that in the USA, autonomy is rather a reward for schools that have the least amount of need, whereas in the other three countries it could be a result of strategies to improve schools in need. The paper discusses possible explanations in the policies and support structures for SSDCs. Originality/value The effects of increased school autonomy and accountability on student achievement have been discussed at length. How different accountability policies affect the autonomy of schools with the highest needs has so far not been studied. The study can be understood as a first step to unravel this association. Following steps should include in-depth investigations of the mechanisms underlying increased or diminished autonomy for SSDCs, and the consequences for school improvement in these schools.

Using the nationally representative High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS:09), this study documents that rural and small-town students were significantly less likely to enroll in postsecondary STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) degree programs, compared with their suburban peers. This study also shows that schools attended by rural and small-town students offered limited access to advanced coursework and extracurricular programs in STEM and had lower STEM teaching capacity. Those opportunities to learn in STEM were linked to the widening geographic gaps in STEM academic preparation. Overall, our findings suggest that during high school rural and small-town students shifted away from STEM fields and that geographic disparities in postsecondary STEM participation were largely explained by students' demographics and precollege STEM career aspirations and academic preparation.

Student attendance is increasingly recognized as an important measure of educational success, which has spurred a body of research examining the extent to which schools can affect this outcome. However, prior work almost exclusively focuses on teachers, and no studies have explicitly examined the importance of school leaders. This study begins to fill this gap by estimating principal value-added to student absences. Drawing on statewide data from Tennessee over a decade, I find that principal effects on student absences are comparable in magnitude to effects on student achievement. Moving from the 25th to 75th percentile in principal value-added decreases student absences by 1.4 instructional days and lowers the probability of chronic absenteeism by 4 percentage points. Principals have larger effects in urban and high-poverty schools, which also have the highest baseline absenteeism rates. Finally, principals who excel at decreasing student absences may not be those who excel at increasing student test scores, and high-stakes accountability measures, such as supervisor ratings, fail to identify principals who decrease student absenteeism.

This paper examines how public school teachers take up, modify, or resist the dominant ideology of color-blind racism. This examination is based on in-depth interviews with 60 teachers at three segregated schools: one was race/class privileged and two were disadvantaged. Inductive coding revealed that teachers at each school articulated a shared frame to talk about race and class: \"legitimated advantage\" at Heritage High School, \"trickle-down dysfunction\" at Bunker High School, and \"antiracist dignity\" at Solidarity High School. Each represents an inequality frame: a local meaning system that mediates the dominant race/class ideology, arising from teachers' shared experiences of inequality in the school-as-workplace. The frames I observed responded to three organizational conditions that affected teachers' experiences of inequality: school demographics, material resources, and professional culture. Variations in these conditions across schools provided opportunity spaces for teachers to either accept race/class domination as common sense or to critique it.

The Tennessee Achievement School District (ASD) is among several state-run districts established to turn around underperforming schools. Like other such districts, the ASD removes schools from local control and is not accountable to local political institutions. Despite its authority, the ASD has encountered opposition within Memphis where its schools reside. For those inclined to its market orientation and suspicious of traditional districts, the ASD is an innovative effort to improve outcomes for disadvantaged students. For those that see educational failure in Memphis as the result of social and economic isolation, the ASD appears motivated by profit, paternalism, and racism. A third narrative, largely hidden from view, encompasses people who reject state takeover but seek to confront structural causes of poor performance.