An Educators' Guide to Schoolwide Reform

The Accelerated Schools approach was developed in the belief that at-risk students should have the same rich curriculum and instruction typically reserved for the "gifted and talented." The approach's name signifies the developer's conviction that at-risk students must learn at an accelerated pace to catch up with more advantaged students. Thus, the primary goal is for at-risk students to perform at grade level by the end of sixth grade.

Under the approach, members of the school community are encouraged to work together to transform classrooms into environments where students think creatively, explore their interests, and achieve at high levels. Central to this approach is the work of John Dewey, an education philosopher who believed that an "effective education" in a democratic country implies faith in the potential of children and adults to understand and shape the world.

The approach is grounded in three principles. The first is unity of purpose, which means that parents, teachers, students, and administrators strive toward a common set of goals. The second is school-site decisions and responsibility, in which all members of the school community are encouraged to share responsibility for making and implementing decisions, and for holding themselves accountable for the results. The third principle is building on strengths, which means that schools should draw on the expertise and experience of everyone involved in the school community. The approach was developed by Henry Levin, Professor of Higher Education at the Stanford University School of Education. Accelerated Schools was first implemented in two San Francisco Bay Area elementary schools in 1986. Today, there are more than 1,000 Accelerated Schools in 40 states.

Strength of Research Base. Research on the effectiveness of Accelerated Schools is marginal. Five studies examined the effects of Accelerated Schools on student achievement. Four followed a single school for two years; the fifth compared eight Accelerated Schools with schools that had implemented other reform models. Two of the five studies were considered sufficiently rigorous to report the findings here: one was conducted by a principal and a local professor; the other was conducted by independent researchers. However, the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation is currently conducting a large independent study of Accelerated Schools that focuses on student achievement and other outcomes. This study should be released in 1999. In addition, the developer collects and makes available to the public data on test score gains for Accelerated Schools.

There is a strong base of research on implementation. Eight studies tracked the implementation progress of Accelerated Schools, and four studies in single schools (noted above) confirm some of the patterns observed in these studies.

Effects on Students. Of the two rigorous studies that report student effects, both suggest that Accelerated Schools improves student achievement, at least on certain measures. In one study of a school where the approach was well implemented, student test scores in reading, writing, language, and mathematics improved over two years, in most cases surpassing the scores of students in a matched control school. Student achievement had been below grade level in reading and language (on the Metropolitan Achievement Test) before the school adopted the Accelerated Schools approach; after two years of using the approach, students in most grades were achieving above grade level.

Another study compared Accelerated Schools to schools using Success for All and locally developed reform programs, grouping schools to control for socioeconomic status and controlling for students' prior achievement. Among schools with moderate poverty (43 to 54 percent of students receiving free or reduced-price lunch), the Accelerated Schools outperformed the others on Word Attack, but did not perform as well on Writing. In a group of high-poverty schools (62 to 71 percent free or reduced-price lunch), Accelerated Schools outscored Success for All on Writing, but did not do as well on Word Attack.

Organizational Change, Staffing, and Administrative Support. Accelerated Schools encourages broad participation in decision making by administrators, teachers, and parents. Collaborative inquiry guides school organization, which serves as a model for governance.

Schools are required to create two faculty positions: a part-time (25 percent) coach, and a part-time internal facilitator. The coach, typically someone affiliated with the district office, the state department of education, or a university, provides some of the training and technical assistance required to implement the approach. The facilitator, typically a member of the school's staff, assists the coach in this process.

Curriculum and Instruction. The developer expects each school to make its own decisions about curriculum, instructional strategies, and resource allocation. However, it expects the Accelerated Schools philosophy to guide those choices. For example, Accelerated Schools literature emphasizes educational philosopher John Dewey's belief that children learn best through collaborative inquiry, which involves working with others to solve shared problems. Schools are expected to implement a curriculum that provides all students with opportunities to use hands-on approaches to solve problems while working in pairs or in small groups.

In addition, the developer encourages schools to make curricular and pedagogical choices that emphasize student strengths, language development across subjects, and problem-solving and higher-order analytic skills. The developer also expects decisions to be guided by common objectives for all students, and hopes that schools will provide opportunities for students to understand what they are learning by grounding that learning within the communities and cultures of the students.

Supplies and Materials. The developer does not require or provide schools with particular materials, but recommends that materials be consistent with the curricular approach described above.

Scheduling and Grouping. Schools are encouraged (but not required) to group children heterogeneously, to use cross-age groups, and to use students as peer tutors.

Monitoring of Student Progress and Performance. In addition to the kind of student learning that standardized tests measure, the developer recommends that schools measure student creativity and resourcefulness, critical-thinking skills, and problem-solving abilities. The developer also suggests the use of demonstration projects and portfolios of student work.

Family and Community Involvement. The developer believes that involvement of parents is central to the success of Accelerated Schools. Parents are expected to read and agree to a statement that clarifies the school's goals and outlines the obligations of parents, students, and the school staff. Schools encourage parents to become involved with the decision-making process by joining task forces or committees.

Professional Development and Technical Assistance. During pre-service training, a core team, consisting of the principal, the coach, and the internal facilitator, receives training from either the developer's headquarters at Stanford University or one of 13 satellite centers located across the country. Training involves an intensive five-day summer workshop, two subsequent two-day sessions on "inquiry" (active questioning) and "powerful learning" (learning that arises from an alignment of school organization, climate, curriculum, and instruction), and ongoing mentoring by a center staff member. The coach provides two days of training for the entire school just before the school year begins.

During the first school year, the coach provides six days of professional development designed to help the school implement the components of Accelerated Schools. Coaches also provide schools with ongoing support, by visiting each school at least once a week and facilitating meetings among school faculty.

In the second and third years, schools continue to receive regular on-site assistance from the coach, who targets assistance toward those components of the Accelerated Schools model that the school finds most challenging. Schools may continue to receive assistance related to implementing the components of the programs, or add new topics (e.g., aligning the school curriculum with state and district policies) as needed.

Schools have the option of entering into a Basic Partnership Agreement with the developer. Schools that exercise this option also receive one visit per year from an Accelerated Schools Project staff member and attend a year-end retreat to review progress and to plan. The Accelerated Schools Project also conducts national and regional conferences for staff from participating schools. A newsletter, published three times a year, focuses on implementation topics, such as the role of coaching and successful experiences of Accelerated Schools.

Schools may extend their agreement with the developer by contracting with one of 13 regional satellite centers for additional site visits and other services as needed. Information about some of the training and professional development activities offered by satellite centers is available through the Accelerated Schools Web site.

Implementation Requirements and Schools' Experiences. Accelerated Schools staff recommend that interested schools complete a two-phase exploration process (lasting from one to three months) before implementing the approach. In the first phase, the developer recommends that the entire staff read about the approach, talk to experienced principals and coaches, and visit schools that have adopted the approach. In the second phase, the developer recommends that school staff have conversations with the national center or one of the satellite centers.

Schools wishing to adopt the Accelerated Schools approach must take a formal vote: at least 90 percent of the full-time staff and community representatives must approve the decision to become an Accelerated School. In addition, the developer recommends involving students in age-appropriate discussions throughout the process. Finally, the developer advises schools to recruit for the position of coach, either from the local school district, the state department of education, or a local university.

Transformation into an Accelerated School is a two-part process, beginning with "taking stock," in which the school community attempts to achieve a shared vision for the school. The school then identifies priorities and analyzes problems through the "inquiry process," a system to help identify problems, find and implement solutions, and assess results. The developer estimates that full implementation will take five years.

Central to implementation is continual self-evaluation. Toward this end, the developer has created an assessment tool kit with five tools: (1) a school questionnaire; (2) a coach's journal; (3) a school data portfolio; (4) guidelines for collecting school documents; and (5) benchmarks to compare each school with a "model" Accelerated School.

Implementation studies indicate that adopting the approach is a slow process, one that can be frustrating for school staff. Some schools found it easier to implement the more concrete aspects of the approach, such as changing specific instructional strategies. In addition, some studies determined that successful adoption of the approach was influenced by the administration, and that administrative changes in the school could hinder implementation.

Positive implementation findings include an increased sense of collaboration among teachers, more parent and community involvement, and the use of more innovative teaching methods in Accelerated Schools. Some studies suggest that these characteristics of Accelerated Schools make them especially appropriate for special education students.

The first-year cost of implementing Accelerated Schools is $27,000, but schools can bring this cost down to $14,000 by reassigning current staff to fill key positions, such as internal facilitator.

The developer charges $13,000 to $15,000 per year for a Basic Partnership Agreement, a minimum three-year commitment. The first year of the Basic Partnership Agreement includes: training for the coach, principal, and internal facilitator (excluding travel); training materials and three copies of the Accelerated Schools Resource Guide; one visit by a project staff member; technical assistance by phone and e-mail; a year-end retreat; a subscription to the Accelerated Schools newsletter; and access to an electronic network of Accelerated Schools. In the second and third years, the Agreement includes targeted professional development, ongoing technical assistance, one visit by an Accelerated Schools staff member, the year-end retreat, and a subscription to the newsletter.

Schools will accrue costs in addition to that of the Basic Partnership Agreement, including 25 percent of the salary and benefits of the coach (estimated at between $12,000 and $20,000 if the coach is external to the school). According to the developer, there is no additional expense for faculty release time for professional development; the developer works with the school to fit professional development into existing district-allocated training days.

An independent study comparing costs of school reform approaches estimated that the Accelerated Schools approach would cost $17,000 per year for a school of 500 students for minimal implementation (coach commitment of 20 percent time, and training time reallocated from other activities). The approach could cost as much as $80,000 for a school of 500 students if the coach is assigned to the school 50 percent time and the school pays for release time or stipends for teachers. These estimates include the coach's salary and benefits ($12,000 to $30,000); the coach's training ($5,000); and school staff training ($0 to $45,000). According to the developer, however, no Accelerated School has ever incurred these hypothetical expenses.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Ms. Claudette Sprague
National Center for the Accelerated Schools Project
Stanford University
CERAS 109
Stanford, CA 94305-3084

Phone: 650-725-1676
Fax: 650-725-6140
E-mail: hf.cys@forsythe.stanford.edu
Web site: http://www.stanford.edu/group/ASP