Schools that improved focused on multiple mutually-reinforcing aspects of school organization rather than a single aspect¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2003 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Strong schools or schools that improved focused on improving multiple, mutually-reinforcing aspects of school organization and practice rather than a single aspect, and used an array of complementary, reinforcing strategies rather than only one. → Smylie 2003

Evidence¶

Smylie 2003¶

Smylie, M. A., Wenzel, S. A., with Allensworth, E., Fendt, C., Hallman, S., Luppescu, S., & Nagaoka, J. (2003). The Chicago Annenberg Challenge: Successes, Failures, and Lessons for the Future. Consortium on Chicago School Research. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Longitudinal field research on 12 Annenberg schools over five years (Part Two, 'A Closer Look at What Makes School Improvement Successful'; Figure 59). Four factors emerged distinguishing strong/improving schools from weak/nonimproving ones; this is the first.

"Strong schools or schools that improved focused on improving multiple, mutually-reinforcing aspects of school organization and practice (e.g., classroom instruction and aspects of school leadership and professional community that might support instructional improvement) rather than a single aspect of school organization or practice (e.g., instructional improvement alone)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The five essential supports reinforce each other and depend on a school environment infused with mutual trust — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Science and literacy instruction are connected and mutually reinforcing — related
• Teacher activities in CHSRI small schools' professional communities were primarily oriented toward supportive rather than developmental practices — related
• Schools strong in the five essential supports are more likely to improve academically — related