For the next phase of this study, a cross-site analysis of the case study findings was conducted. This section will describe the themes that emerged during data analysis that were consistently identified, either implicitly or explicitly, by the four partner-sites as key elements associated with educational restructuring that involved vocational education and resulted in positive outcomes for diverse student populations. This discussion will extend beyond the case study findings in the first section of this document and will assist the investigators in inducing a practically derived theory and description of existing educational restructuring initiatives. The analytical framework used to organize the cross-site analysis is detailed below.
In order to guide data analysis and reporting, an analytical framework was developed that included the following five components: (1) motives for restructuring, (2) school organization and leadership, (3) students and learning, (4) connecting activities, and (5) evaluation. Each of these components will be discussed briefly below.
Elmore (1990) believes that there are three "motives" pushing school restructuring: (1) economic viability, (2) social equality, and (3) changes within teaching. The motives that each of the four partner-sites explicitly identified or that otherwise emerged will be discussed.
School organization and leadership is the next component in the analytical framework. In all of the literature reviewed, school organization and leadership were included as important elements of successful reform initiatives. This study allowed the participants from the partner-sites to define their own organizational structures in context with their restructuring actions.
Students and learning, the third component of the analytical framework, is used as an advanced organizer to address the curriculum and pedagogy utilized by the sites to increase students' school and postschool outcomes. This component may be the most crucial to the results of the current project. Newmann and Wehlage (1995) have observed that successful educational reform requires more than altering the length of class periods or the type of administrative structure that exists in an educational setting. Reform requires altering how material is presented to students and how understanding that material is assessed.
Connections, the fourth component in the analytical framework, is used to describe the established collaborative relationships both in and out of school that facilitate restructuring efforts. Crossdisciplinary and departmental activities within the school and collaborative relationships with community organizations, colleges, and businesses outside of the traditional academic environment are described. Schools do not function in isolation from the other systems that exist within their communities and throughout society. They need to explicitly foster connections with those other systems in order to be ultimately successful.
The fifth and final component in the analytical framework addresses how each of the sites are evaluating the impact of implementing restructuring efforts. Without evaluative information on the processes and outcomes associated with reform actions, it will be difficult for educational agencies to make formative and summative statements regarding the effectiveness of those efforts. Evaluative information may have tremendous value to others seeking information on the successes and barriers related to specific restructuring initiatives.
Across the four sites, the two most frequently identified motives for restructuring were economic viability and social equality. According to Elmore (1990), the economic viability motive for educational restructuring stems from the business community in the United States pressuring schools to restructure in order to regain, maintain, and hopefully increase economic viability in the emerging global economy. Elmore summarizes this economically based motive, calling for educational reform by stating,
In order to sustain our present standard of living and regain our competitive position in the world, it is argued, we will need a better educated workforce, which will, in turn, mean that schools will have to dramatically improve the way they educate all children. (pp. 1-2)
In three of the four sites, economic viability appears to be the primary motive for implementing restructuring activities. According to a number of teachers and administrators at the sites, the primary reason to change the way schools teach students is to ensure that our society has enough skilled people in the workforce that will be able to generate enough money to support our economic system. On a more personal note, many of the educators interviewed expressed concern about their retirement, wondering whether their current students will be able to support the upkeep of society with limited prospects for economically advantageous employment. This theme was very apparent across three of the sites.
At the fourth site, societal equality was viewed as the primary reason to restructure the school. Elmore (1990) relates social equality to unresolved civil rights issues "stated in the language of demography, equity, and social justice" (p. 2). Elmore summarizes the social equality motive for reform as follows:
The proportion of children living in poverty is increasing, the argument goes, and these children will have to be well-educated if they are to attain economic self-sufficiency and support a growing population of elderly, or our society will face unacceptably high levels of poverty and dependency. (p. 2)
At the site where societal equality emerged as the motive for restructuring, almost all of the faculty interviewed stressed the need to increase the number of individuals from minority populations in professional occupations. Unfortunately, based on the interviews and observations, faculty and staff did not appear to value the role vocational education can play in potentially increasing the number of individuals from minority groups in high skill high pay occupations. This finding was not observed at the other three sites.
Although Elmore (1990) believes that this motive is couched in the ideal of social equity or equality, there exists an element of economic viability embedded within this more socially oriented motive. In other words, reforming education to become more economically viable is one way that individuals from traditionally low socioeconomic circumstances can more fully share in the economic bounty available within the United States. In addition, society at large, particularly the economic well-being of a society at large, benefits from the revenue generated by newly skilled workers who provide a valuable service to the business community while also advancing their individual economic circumstances.
Very little discussion revolved around the motive identified by Elmore (1990) as changes in teaching. According to Elmore,
[e]ducation is losing its claim on the labor pool from which teachers have traditionally been drawn--college educated, largely female, often minority, upwardly mobile young people--who now have access to other professional occupations. If teaching is to regain its competitive position in the labor market, it is contended, schools will have to become more attractive places to work and the economic rewards of teaching will have to become competitive with those of other professional occupations. (p. 2)
This motive, in sum, revolves around the belief that, unless the field of education, in general--and schools, specifically--is an attractive arena in which to work, the best potential teachers will select other, more attractive or potentially more lucrative careers. Conversely, those individuals left to educate (i.e., those willing to enter a less attractive and less financially rewarding profession) will, most likely, be less capable of meeting the varied challenges of teaching. These issues were not addressed at any of the four sites involved in this study.
School organization and leadership is the second component in the analytical framework. In the literature reviewed, school organization and leadership were included as important elements of successful restructuring initiatives. This study allowed individuals from the sites to define their own organizational structures in context with their restructuring actions.
School organization and leadership were different at each of the four sites. At one site, the implementation of block scheduling was the primary restructuring effort. At this site, block scheduling completely altered the structure of the school day. The idea for block scheduling came from the teaching staff, and the leadership provided a supportive but hands-off environment to facilitate the exploration of block scheduling. This leadership style meshed well with the proactive staff that existed at this site.
At the second site, block scheduling was also implemented, however, this was a district-level administration decision rather than a decision that came from the teaching staff. In addition to block scheduling, this site was also working to develop career clusters and at least one career academy within the school. At this site, the building-level leadership acted as a conduit between the central office and the building-level faculty. District-level administrators were also very involved with the school at this site.
At the third site, the vocational education staff was the primary force driving restructuring efforts. The district Tech Prep consortium provided a team of teachers at this school with information and feedback regarding the restructuring activities they were undertaking. Although this small core group of teachers had not been able to implement broad based restructuring actions, they were working on a number of smaller vocationally relevant restructuring activities, including the development of a formal Tech Prep program with a local community college and a career academy at the school.
The fourth site experienced two changes in building-level administration during the 1995-1996 academic year, which inhibited restructuring efforts. In addition to the lack of administrative constancy, teachers at this site appear to be satisfied with the form and function of their school. According to Hord, Rutherford, Huling-Austin, and Hall (1987), unless individuals are aware of the need for change, it is impossible for change to occur. The faculty and staff at this site appear satisfied with their current organization and have not had consistent leadership during the year.
Griesemer and Butler (1983) believe that enhanced student learning is the base element related to the development of educational reform efforts. Without the desire to enhance student learning, thus improving the subsequent outcomes attained by students once they exit the secondary school system, there would be no need to reform the educational system that exists in the United States. In addition, Newmann and Wehlage (1995) have observed that educational reform requires more than altering the length of class periods or the type of administrative structure that exists in an educational setting. Reform requires altering how material is presented to students and how understanding that material is assessed.
Enhanced student learning is an explicit goal at each of the four sites. Every faculty person interviewed from each of the four sites stressed that their school's restructuring activities were, in theory, designed to enhance student learning. For example, at one site where block scheduling has successfully been implemented, many faculty members interviewed did not feel that they had received adequate training on how to incorporate new teaching methods into their classrooms. In other words, the school had changed, but individual teachers may not have made dramatic changes in their classroom behaviors.
All four of the sites have focused restructuring efforts at the school organization level rather than the students and learning level. Even in the two sites that have implemented block scheduling, little has been done to alter the form and processes by which students are provided information in the classroom and by which they are assessed. None of the four sites appear to have developed formats for imparting this information to teachers in a meaningful way.
Schools do not function in isolation from the other systems throughout society and need to explicitly address connections with those other systems in order to be ultimately successful. Connections, the fourth component in the analytical framework, describes the collaborative relationships, both in and out of school, that have been established at each of the sites in an attempt to facilitate restructuring efforts. Cross-disciplinary and cross-departmental activities within the school and collaborative relationships with community organizations and businesses outside of the traditional academic environment have been observed and are described below.
All four of the sites have developed connections with local community colleges and universities. All four of the sites have developed formal or informal Tech Prep programs with local community colleges. In addition, all four of the sites have developed relationships with four-year colleges and universities to assist students in making the transition from high school to college.
However, only one of the four sites has solidified relationships with business and industry. These relationships are important on two fronts. First, the business partners can assist the schools in developing up-to-date programs and practices. Second, the business partners can function as potential work experience sites for students. Without these relationships, the vocational education programs at the remaining three sites are missing these opportunities.
The fifth and final component in the analytical framework addresses how each of the partner-sites are evaluating the impact of their structuring efforts. Without evaluative information describing the processes and outcomes associated with reform initiatives, it will be difficult for educational agencies to make formative and summative statements regarding the effectiveness of their reform actions. This may have tremendous value to others seeking information on the successes and barriers related to specific reform initiatives.
Unfortunately, none of the four sites have addressed the need to evaluate the impact and outcomes associated with their restructuring efforts. One site had previously been involved in a state-level follow-up study; however, that study did not address building-level restructuring efforts. This oversight needs to be addressed in order to verify the successes or failures of these sites' reform efforts.