School Transformation
Wayne Jennings.net
Bio/Background Learning Transformation Bibiography Links/Resources |
|
 |
|
|
|
Startling/Disturbing Research on School Program Effectiveness
Part 1
Wayne Jennings and Joe NathanREPRINTED FROM THE MARCH, 1977 PHI DELTA KAPPAN
This summary of research dating back to the Eight Year Study argues that experimental programs embodying Deweyan concepts have enormous advantages over the traditional. It raises further questions about the so-called back to basics movement.
For more than 50 years now, studies have been documenting the effectiveness of nontraditional school programs in the United States. This research should cause us to question 95% of current educational practice.
Much of this research is not well known. Until recent years, neither was the history of certain ethnic groups and of women in America. Just as history books must be revised to reflect more accurately the experiences of different groups, so must education histories be changed to include the startling, disturbing research which we summarize here.
We have divided the studies into two categories. The first describes results of experimental programs. The second presents research on the effects of traditional schools.
Experimental Practices
The Eight Year Study. One of the most extraordinary experiments ever conducted in American education was the Eight Year Study, once widely cited in the literature but neglected in recent years. This study occurred during the l930s. Thirty high schools signed an agreement with 300 colleges to exempt their graduates from the usual college entrance requirements. This meant that the high schools did not have to use grades, class rank, required courses, credits, etc. They were free to experiment with curriculum and organization.
Some 1,500 students from the experimental schools were paired with 1,500 students from similar but non-experimental schools and were matched by sex, age, intelligence, family background, race, and other factors. The students from experimental schools did as well as the others or were better at college in grades, participation, critical thinking, aesthetic judgment, knowledge of contemporary affairs, etc.1
Further analysis yielded some startling results: When students from the six most experimental schools were compared with those from traditional schools, there were great differences in college attainment. Finally, the two most experimental schools (where practices were indeed different, e.g., extensive learning in the community; outside volunteers working with students; advisor advisee systems; students teaching other students; inter disciplinary, problem solving curricula; etc.) were selected. Graduates of these two schools were found to be "strikingly more successful."2
The Eight Year Study was one of the most significant and exciting studies in the history of American education. Subsequent studies of a similar type have yielded essentially the same results.
One of the schools in the Eight Year Study was the Ohio State University Lab School. The students who graduated in 1938 wrote a book called Were We Guinea Pigs? In general, they liked their school, but of course had little to compare it with, since most of them had gone to the Lab School throughout their high school careers. Many years later a thorough follow up study of the "guinea pigs" was reported in Guinea Pigs 20 Years Later (1961).3 The Lab School graduates were then between 35 and 40 years old. The study found that the "guinea pigs" had been strikingly successful in life. They were compared with subjects in the Lewis Terman study of genius and with graduates of Princeton University, where a similar follow-up had been conducted. The experimental school graduates came out ahead. They more often expressed satisfaction with life, were judged leaders in their professions, had more stable family lives, possessed better self accepting attitudes, and were mentioned more frequently in Who's Who.
Today's Alternative Schools. Since 1970 a number of schools have been established which make use of curriculum and organization ideas developed either by the experimental schools in the thirties or even earlier by John Dewey and other progressive educators. Virtually every evaluation of these contemporary alternative schools shows students doing as well as or better than students in traditional schools, when standardized tests are the evaluation instrument. Perhaps more importantly, they feel better about themselves and are confident of their ability to accomplish things for themselves. They also demonstrate more positive attitudes toward school and learning. These results come from alternative schools in various cities- Cambridge, Chicago, Hartford, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Providence, Philadelphia, and St. Paul, for example.
One might wonder if alternative schools have atypical populations. Educators associated with the National Alternative Schools Program studied 300 public alternative schools and found that the average student body was more diverse racially and economically than the country's population. They also reported an average of two applicants for every alternative school opening.
A number of schools work specifically with students who are rejects of traditional schools. Harlem Prep in New York City was established for dropouts of other schools, yet 95% of its graduates go on to college. Most of them complete college.
The Career Study Center in St. Paul, Minnesota, was created for students who are unsuccessful in the city's traditional high schools, where they are typically truant half the time. Some 70% of CSC candidates are in trouble with the law, and schools and parents are at their wits' end. After some time in the progressively designed program at CSC, attendance rises to 80%. Youngsters then get out of trouble and their parents can hardly believe the change in attitude toward schooling. Ninety percent graduate, although the original prognosis was that only 10% would do so. Career Study Center I was so successful that a second has been established.
It is too early to tell whether these alternative programs will yield long term results as satisfactory as those of the experimental schools in the Eight Year Study. However, there is reason to believe that today's alternative schools will produce effective, competent, and stable adults.
Predictive Studies. Recent studies challenge traditional notions about how one predicts success in later life. Consider, for example, the national mania for graduation from high school. Is graduation important to later success? One study reports on students enrolled in California colleges which accepted anyone who applied, disregarding high school diplomas.4 Seven percent of 32,000 whose records were examined (2,240 students) had not received a diploma. The grade point average for these students was 2.56; for all students it was 2.51. The data were then corrected for age, sex, marital status, veteran status, family income, etc. Results remained the same: The non-graduates were doing as well as or better than the graduates.
Even more startling is a pair of studies which question even the value of grades and test scores in predicting success. The American College Testing Service recently completed a study of itself which compared the value of four factors in predicting success (as measured by self satisfaction and participation in a variety of community activities two years after college). The factors were: 1) major achievement in what most high schools call extra curricular activity (debate, speech, journalism, etc.), 2) high grades in high school, 3) high grades in college, 4) high scores on the ACT. Three of the four factors were found to have no predictive value. The only factor which could be used to predict success in later life was achievement in "extracurricular" activities.5
The College Entrance Examination Board's Scholastic Aptitude Test was examined for its accuracy in predicting how successful a person might be at a chosen career upon graduation from college. Results show that "the SATs offered virtually no clue to capacity for significant intellectual or creative contributions in mature life."6 That is, there was virtually no correlation between high scores on the SAT and success in life. This study also found that the best predictor of creativity in mature life was a person's performance, during youth, in independent self sustained ventures. Those youngsters who had many hobbies, interests, and jobs, or were active in extracurricular activities, were more likely to be successful in later life. This study also found that admissions officers relied increasingly upon SAT scores. In other words, they were making serious mistakes.
Both studies show that test scores predict who will get good grades in college but that such academic success has almost nothing to do with success in later life.
Many other studies reveal nearly a zero correlation between college grades and later success in such fields as medicine, law, education, engineering, etc.7
For Project TALENT, one thousand 30 year olds were interviewed in one of our most nationally representative follow-up studies. Robert Gagne summarized the findings in one terse sentence "The evidence of these interviews suggests that high school education as a whole serves no very useful purpose."8
New Ways of Organizing Schools. There is ample evidence that organizing total schools in very different ways makes sense. The studies we have mentioned were made where alternative schools are "total sys-tems." But it is important to look at results of studies which deal only with parts of a program.
An international study of mathematics achievement is of particular interest. Ordinarily, the beginning age for studying math is 6. The study shows that in some countries math instruction is delayed until age 7, and in a few instances to age 8. The study found that students who are taught math late quickly catch up with those who are taught earlier. Differences of as much as two years of instruction made no difference in math achievement. Moreover, those who have the latest initial math instruction have fewer negative attitudes toward school and themselves.9
In the area of remedial reading, a number of studies indicate a substantial gain in achievement after remedial instruction. Within a year these gains disappear and the child appears to have made only the progress one would expect without the remedial instruction.10
It has been known for a long time that scores on standardized achievement tests are very stable. Considerable reductions in time spent on reading, math, and spelling (the basics!) did not reduce achievement scores, according to a 1932 review of studies.11 This result has been affirmed many times since.
The Plowden Report in England found that the integrated day approach became increasingly prevalent in English primary schools after World War II. Students who did not have the usual long, thorough, carefully graded and sequenced reading, math, and writing instruction did as well as students where lesson hearing and workbooks were emphasized.12 That stunning finding led to much interest in the open classroom in the U.S.
Numerous studies indicate that children can be very effective at teaching other students in a one to-one situation. Typically, the studies show that the student being taught (usually younger) learns better than would be expected and that the older student or tutor learns a good deal more, even when initially weak in the subject. Teaching what one has learned to another appears to be a very effective learning reinforcement.13
There is a growing acceptance of different organizations for learning. Public alternative schools have increased from fewer than 10 in 1970 to more than 1,200 by 1975. Parents and students who have participated in these programs are often their best advocates. The research done on alternatives indicates that hopes have been fulfilled.14 At least one regional accreditation association (the North Central Association) has developed new standards so that alternative schools could be evaluated and accredited. Three alternatives in the Midwest received accreditation last year under these standards. Thus the people who are pushing for new kinds of learning have strong support.
In a recent review, Robert A. Horwitz compared the performance of about 75 studies of open classroom and traditional classroom students in these areas: academic achievement, self-concept, attitudes toward school, creativity, adjustment and anxiety, locus of control, and cooperation.15 In every area the open school children did as well as or better than the traditional school students. If the open schools cost no more (and the researchers say they don't), and if the parents and children like them better (the researchers say they do), then why shouldn't the open schools have the right to exist as an alternative?
Traditional Schools/Learning
Myths About Effectiveness. Many commonly held beliefs about the effectiveness of our traditional schools are questionable. Among those beliefs are that children need to be in school five days per week, that increased expenditures to do more of the same thing will make a significant difference, that schools prepare students well for our society, and that the environment of most schools is conducive to learning.
Two little known studies pose major questions about the necessity of much formal school time. The Unity (Maine) School District found itself in financial trouble four years ago and decided to institute a four day week for students to save money on busing and cafeteria costs. The staff continued with a five day week, devoting one day to in-service training. The Maine Department of Education was upset and gave its approval for the plan only with the stipulation that extensive tests be given to compare student achievement with previous years. These tests were conducted by the University of Maine. The evaluation director's conclusion was that, with the four day student week, "gains clearly outweighed losses when considering the grade-equivalent scores of all students tested." The Maine commissioner of education congratulated the district on its "foresight and initiative."16
Similar results were obtained from a study following the Philadelphia teachers strike in 1972 73. The strike lasted eight weeks. Some schools were closed and others were open the entire time. At the end of the year, scores of students who attended full time during the strike were compared with those of students who were out the entire eight weeks. No significant differences in achievement were found between the two groups.17
Behind the Classroom Door. Attitude investigations show that by late elementary school age nearly 20% of children dislike school; the remaining majority "do not feel strongly about their classroom experience one way or another." One study found that even children classified as satisfied with their school experience describe it with such adjectives as "boring," "dull, or inadequate." The children themselves feel "uncertain" or "restless."18
Such results lead to questions about what is happening in traditional schools "behind the classroom door." A study which used that phrase as its title listed well known principles of learning. Researchers went into the schools to see to what extent these principles of learning were practiced. The answer was, to put it succinctly, "Inadequately."19 This study's findings are similar to others in which teachers have been questioned about their knowledge of modern principles of learning, i.e., students should be actively involved in their own learning, students can learn from a variety of people, success leads to future success, etc. In each case, teachers appeared to know little about such principles. Even when teachers can verbalize them, the principles are rarely applied in their classrooms.
Given such facts, it is not surprising that observers entering the average U.S. classroom find a good deal of boring activity and a sense of program dullness. In one recent study, researchers found that attitudes toward most school subjects became measurably more negative in the course of a single year.20 Other studies have shown that, with each advancing year in school, children's evaluations of teachers and curricula, as well as of themselves as people, became increasingly less favorable.21
This finding reminds us of mental health studies which indicate that about one third of U.S. adults are seriously ill, while another third need some attention. Only about one third have good mental health.22 It's not a happy record for our society- or for the schools, which are supposed to help people achieve their potential.
Clearly, people's learning and achievement capabilities are not being realized. A recent U.S. Office of Education study asked 7,500 adults questions to see if they were competent at tasks the researchers considered necessary for survival in our society. The tasks included knowing where to apply for social security benefits; how to figure which is a better bargain: one half gallon of milk for 79 cents or a gallon for $1.10; how to read a sample ballot; etc. The study found that from 20 33% of adults could not achieve minimum levels (depending on the tasks) and that another 20 30% functioned but without proficiency.23
All Contents Copyright © 2004 Wayne Jennings.
