SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS
The Background To School Effectiveness Research
School effectiveness research in both the United Kingdom and the United States of America arose to respond to and challenge the 'conventional wisdom' of the time which was summarised by Bernstein (1970) as 'education cannot compensate for society'.
Effective schools research
In the United States during the 1960s descriptive studies had been produced of schools that were considered to be effective. The question that became central was why were there some -albeit few schools - which seemed to get good educational results despite having students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The hope was that if such schools could be identified, researchers could ascertain their differences from more typical schools and then school reforms based on effective school practices could be introduced and ineffective schools transformed into effective ones.
Using a variety of measures to identify 'effective schools' the first studies identified 'outlier' schools that were performing much better and much worse than average. Researchers studied these schools and identified what they considered to be the characteristics of the effective ones. As Purkey and Smith (1983 p.429-430) commented "..reviews do not always find the same features to be characteristic of effective schools, even when considering basically the same literature...(and).. while all reviews assume that effective schools can be differentiated from ineffectiveness, there is no consensus yet on just what the salient characteristics happen to be.".
However the most influential among a number of lists produced was Edmonds (1979) which highlighted five factors of the effective school.
The five factors identified were:
(a) strong leadership of the principal
(b) emphasis on mastery of basic skills
(c) a clean, orderly and secure school environment
(d) high teacher expectations of pupil performance
(e) frequent monitoring of students to assess their progress
In Britain in the 1970s it was the pioneering work of Reynolds in South Wales (1976), and in terms of national publicity Rutter and his colleagues study of London schools (1979), which led to a change in the intellectual climate as regards the power of the school. Their work highlighted that schools with markedly similar intakes serving similar catchment areas had different outcomes. Rutter et. al.'s (1979) pioneering study claimed that effective schools were characterised by "the degree of academic emphasis, teacher actions in lessons, the availability of incentives and rewards, good conditions for pupils, and the extent to which children are able to take responsibility." (Rutter et. al. 1979 p.178) . These findings were later supported by Mortimore et. al. (1988) study of London primary schools and Smith and Tomlinson's (1989) of multi racial comprehensive schools. The Mortimore study was notable for the wide range of outcomes on which schools were assessed (including mathematics, reading, writing, attendance, behaviour and attitudes to school) and for the collection of data on school and classroom processes. The Smith and Tomlinson study is notable for the large differences shown in the academic effectiveness between schools and for the substantial variation it reported on results in different school subjects, reflecting the influence of different school departments. For example, a school that was positioned 'first' in mathematics attainment was 'fifteenth' in English achievement (after allowance had been made for intake quality).
Studies undertaken in a variety of contexts, on different age groups, and in different countries (the United States, Netherlands, Canada, Australia and New Zealand), confirmed the existence of significant differences between schools in students' achievements. The approach adopted by the great majority of the researchers was quantitative, with empirical data being collected on intakes into schools, on outputs (both academic and social) from schools, and on classroom and social processes that appear to be associated with lower or higher gains than expected in student achievement. By 1990 in the first issue of a journal devoted to school effectiveness and school improvement the editors were able to claim confidently "schools matter, that schools do have major effects upon children's development and that, to put it simply, schools do make a difference" (Reynolds and Creemers 1990 p.1).
As Reynolds and Creemers (1990p.1) argue interest in school effectiveness and improvement has been "fuelled by the central place that educational quality (and sometimes equity) issues have assumed in the policy concerns of most developed and many developing societies". In Britain as education entered centre stage politically with The Great Debate, issues such as general standards, the achievements of comprehensive schools, the effects of particular teaching and learning styles and the relative educational achievements of different ethnic groups were raised and the notion of the 'effective school' became a centre of debate in the educational community. At roughly the same time as the research community focused on school effectiveness, HMIs in England and Wales were beginning to identify from their inspections of individual schools the factors which in their judgement were associated with The Good School. In Ten Good Schools (HMI 1977) the good school is described as one that shows "quality in its aims, its oversight of pupils, its curriculum design, in standards of teaching and academic achievements and in its links with the local community. What they all have in common is effective leadership and a "climate" that is conducive to growth."(HMI 1977 p.36). The model of the effective school contained within these early documents is the one that is still contained within The Framework for the Inspection of Schools in England and Wales.
Effective schools
Mortimore (1991)p.9 has defined an effective school as one in which pupils progress further than might be expected from consideration of its intake In other words an effective school adds extra value to its students' outcomes in comparison with other schools serving similar intakes. By contrast an ineffective school is one in which students make less progress than expected given their characteristics at intake. .(Sammons, Hillman and Mortimore 1995a p.3.).
The recent review by Sammons et.al. (1995a) for OFSTED focuses on the British context and identifies eleven factors which it is claimed apply to both primary and secondary schools. The authors point out that the great majority of the studies they have reviewed have focused exclusively on students' cognitive outcomes in areas such as reading, mathematics or public examination results and only a few on social/affective outcomes. The factors identified therefore are those likely to be associated with the academically effective school. Whether these same factors are associated with the schools effective in influencing social and affective outcomes requires further research as does whether the same factors influence student achievement in varying catchment areas.
ELEVEN FACTORS FOR EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS
|
|
| 1.
Professional leadership
|
Three
characteristics have been found to be associated with successful leadership Firm and purposeful strength of purpose, involving proactive management, an emphasis upon recruitment of people who 'fit' the school and the generation of consistency and purpose within the school's management team
A participative approach sharing of leadership positions and the involvement of teachers in school management and curriculum planning and to consultation with teachers about spending and other policy decisions
The leading professional
the head teacher's role as the 'leading professional' implying
involvement in and knowledge about what goes on in the classroom, including the
curriculum, teaching strategies and the monitoring of pupil progress.
|
| 2.
Shared vision and goals
|
Schools
are clearly more effective when staff build consensus on the aims and values of
the school and where they put this into practice through consistent and
collaborative ways of working. This is seen in: Unity of purpose involving a consensus on values Consistency of practice in which adopting a particular approach to school curriculum guidelines and to discipline has a positive impact on the progress of pupils
Collegiality and collaboration
|
| 3.
A learning environment
|
The
ethos of a school is partly determined by the vision, values and goals of the
staff and also by the climate in which pupils work. Two key aspects of this
latter factor are: An orderly atmosphere
An attractive working environment
|
| 4.
Concentration on teaching and learning
|
This
is generated by: Maximisation of learning time This includes the proportion of the day given to academic subjects, the proportion of time given in lessons devoted to learning or to interaction with pupils, the proportion of time spent on work matters rather than on administrative/maintenance activities and the existence of well managed lesson transitions Academic emphasis the entry of a high proportion of the pupils in public examinations and senior staff checking that homework had been done.
Focus on achievement
|
| 5.
Purposeful teaching
|
Efficient
organisation preparing lessons in advance Clarity of purpose Structured lessons Adaptive practice
a well defined framework within which a degree of pupil independence and
responsibility for managing their own learning can be encouraged
|
| 6.
High expectations
|
High
expectations all round this involves the teachers taking a more active role in helping pupils Communicating expectations the communication and reinforcement of expectations
Providing intellectual challenge
|
7. Positive reinforcement
|
Clear
and fair discipline Feedback
direct and positive feedback such as praise and appreciation
|
| 8.
Monitoring progress
|
Well
established mechanisms for monitoring the performance and progress of pupils,
classes, the school as a whole and the efficacy of improvement programmes Monitoring pupil performance for example, sound record keeping Evaluating school performance
evaluating school performance as in the notions of programme evaluation
within models of cyclical school improvement
|
| 9.
Pupils rights and responsibilities
|
Raising
pupil self esteem good staff/pupil relations and shared out of school activities between teachers and pupils Positions of responsibility the positive effects of having high proportions of pupils with positions of responsibility within the school, thus conveying trust in pupils and setting standards of mature behaviour
Control of work
|
| 10.
Home-school partnership
|
Parental
involvement in their children's learning
|
| 11.
A learning organisation
|
School
based staff development
|
Adapted from: SAMMONS, P.,HILLMAN,J., AND MORTIMORE,P. (1995) KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS A REVIEW OF SCHOOL EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH A report by the Institute of Education for the Office for Standards in Education p.8
and
Reynolds, D. et. al. (1996) "School Effectiveness and School Improvement in the United Kingdom" School Effectiveness and School Improvement 7,2,133-158
The dangers of simplistic interpretations
However researchers in the field have been keen to challenge some of the more simplistic interpretations that have been made of their work.
1) Early beliefs that the influence of effective schools might be as large as family or community influences now appear misplaced. Different researchers estimate the school effect at different levels but the majority of researchers claim between 8-18% of variation in student outcomes can be explained by school and classroom factors when we take into account the background of students. Many researchers identify the figures at the lower end of between 8-10 or 15%. Expressed as percentages school and classroom effects do not appear exceptionally large, but in terms of differences between schools in students' outcomes they can be highly significant both educationally and socially. In Britain this has been translated into more easily recognised outcomes and the range could mean the difference between schools value added scores of between seven grade E or seven grade C results at GCSE (Thomas and Mortimore 1994). There are strong suggestions that the size of primary school effects may be greater than those of secondary schools ( Sammons et. al. 1995b).
2) Research has also shown that early beliefs that school effects were distinct from teacher or classroom effects were misplaced since studies increasingly show the great majority of the variation between schools is in fact due to classroom variation. The unique variation due to the influence of the school shrinks to quite small levels. Consequently some have argued that more study should be devoted to the study of the effective classroom rather than to the effective school. Recent research has pointed to considerable variation in departmental effectiveness within the same school and to the importance of consdieration of issues such as whether year group effectiveness could be another significant variable.
3. Research has indicated that we should remain sceptical over whether schools remain 'effective' or 'ineffective' over long periods of time (say five to seven years). Nuttall et. al (1989) have shown that school performance can vary quite rapidly over two or three years.
4. It used to be thought that the 'effective school' was so across a range of both academic and social outcomes. Mortimore's et. al. study (1988) showed that academic effectiveness is not necessarily associated with social or 'affective' effectiveness.
5. Furthermore the belief that effective schools are effective for all subgroups of pupils within them is no longer tenable as there is evidence of different school effects for children of different ethnic groups, ability ranges and socio-economic backgrounds within the same school.
What are the continuing problems in research on effective schools?
Research into effective schools is continuing. Researchers in different countries are addressing a range of different questions and problems. Among the most important are:
a) How to extend the range of outcome measures. Studies which focus on only one or two outcomes may give only a partial picture of effectiveness, both in terms of effects and the correlates of effectiveness.
b) How to ensure that adequate controls for differences between school intakes have been made to ensure that 'like is compared with like'. Ideally information about individual pupils, including baseline measures of prior attainment, personal, socio-economic and family characteristics are required.
c) The need to extend the research base. Up till now research has used a very small sample of schools. These schools are often outlier schools i.e. they are either highly effective or highly ineffective. In fact they are most likely to be effective schools as little work has been undertaken until now on ineffective schools (Reynolds 1994).
d) More consideration needs to be given to context in interpreting results. Most of the studies undertaken have been in inner cities. It is difficult to know whether the findings have general applicability. In Britain there have been few studies, for example, of very advantaged catchment areas or of independent schools with intakes from very affluent backgrounds
e) Are there significant differences between phases and are the variations between schools and teachers greater in the different phases?
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bernstein, B. (1970) "Education cannot compensate for society" New Society 387, 344-47
Edmonds, R.R. (1979) "Effective schools for the urban poor" Educational Leadership 37,1, 20-24
Harris, A. et. al. (1996) School Effectiveness and School Improvement London: Pitman
HMI (1977) Ten Good Schools London: HMSO
Mortimore, P. et. al. (1988) School Matters: The Junior Years Somerset: Open Books
Nuttall, D.I., et. al. (1989) "Differential school effectiveness" International Journal of Educational Research 13,7, 769-776
Purkey,S. and Smith, M. (1983) "Effective schools: a review" The Elementary School Journal 83, 427-462
Reynolds, D. (1976) "The delinquent school" in Woods, P. ed. The Process of Schooling London: Routledge and Kegan Paul
Reynolds, D. and Creemers, B. (1990) "School Effectiveness and School Improvement: a Mission Statement" School Effectiveness and School Improvement 1,1,1-3
Reynolds, D. et. al. (1996)"School Effectiveness and School Improvement in the United Kingdom" School Effectiveness and School Improvement 7,2,133-158
Rutter, M. et. al. ((1979) Fifteen Thousand Hours London; Open Books
Sammons, P., Hillman, J. and Mortimore, P. (1995a) Key Characteristics of Effective Schools: A review of school effectiveness research A report by the Institute of Education for the Office for Standards in Education
Sammons, P., Nuttall, D., Cuttance, P. and Thomas, S. (1995b) "Continuity of school effects: a longitudinal analysis of primary and secondary school effects on GCSE performance" School Effectiveness and School Improvement 6,285-307
Smith, D. and Tomlinson, S. (1989) The School Effect: A Study of Multi-Racial Comprehensives London: Policy Studies Institute
The views expressed in this document are those of the document owner.
If you are an authorised user you may
edit
this document through your Web browser.