Missing Pieces of the Educational Reform Agenda: Or, Why the First and Second Waves May Miss the Boat

Urban educators’ perceptions of culturally relevant pedagogy and school reform mandates

“…These initial reforms focused on systemic changes such as increased core requirements (Boyer 1990). The second attempts came in response to critiques that initial attempts did not succeed (Hawley 1988). Strengthening the relationships between schools and families and renewed attention to teacher education were the focus of the second attempts (Hawley 1988).…”

“…The second attempts came in response to critiques that initial attempts did not succeed (Hawley 1988). Strengthening the relationships between schools and families and renewed attention to teacher education were the focus of the second attempts (Hawley 1988). We have now entered a ''third wave'' of school reform, a focus on reforming teacher practice (Desimone 2002).…”

8 Political and financial support for school‐based and child‐centred reforms

“…School personnel would also identify appropriate teaching techniques and related staffing needs. Restructuring urban schools in this way would address values of concern to teachers, providing a larger role in defining and administering school policies, improving working conditions and recognizing teachers as professionals, and devolving greater authority over resources and curricula from central offices to schools (Hawley 1988, Schlechty 1990.…”

“…The need for improved services in cities requires diverse constituents to set aside differences and become advocates for children and youth. Hawley (1988) labels social programmes and preventive policies to address needs of prospective parents and preschool children as 'investment in children strategies'. He contends that families should assume advocacy roles in demanding appropriate services for their children from multiple public agencies, but '... when families are unable or lack the resources to make demands on the various institutions on which their children must depend, children's needs go unmet'.…”

Helping Teachers Prepare to Work in Restructured Schools

“…Many reformers have assumed that empowering teachers will lead to improved learning opportunities and outcomes for students. However, critics (Hawley, 1988; Murphy, in press a) have argued that direct efforts to improve classroom teaching are needed if restructured schools are to correct the weaknesses in American education. Advocates of restructured schools and efforts to empower teachers suggest several changes that are needed in classrooms (see Evertson, Murphy, & Radnofsky, 1990, for a review) : (a) less reliance on traditional organizational arrangements (e. g., tracking, homogeneous ability grouping) and more innovation in the delivery of programs (e.g., flexible schedules, schools within schools), (b) less didactic teaching and greater reliance on interactive and cooperative instructional strategies, (c) emphasis on depth (less is more) and interdisciplinary approaches in the curriculum, in conjunction with greater teacher choice (i.e., less standardization of materials and strategies), (d) greater student engagement in the learning process with both more active and more meaningful involvement, and (e) increased attention to an equitable distribution of important classroom resources such as time, quality of instruction, and rewards.…”