xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam a22 u 4500
controlfield tag 008 c20039999azu 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E11-00314
Educational policy analysis archives.
n Vol. 11, no. 16 (May 14, 2003).
Tempe, Ariz. :
b Arizona State University ;
Tampa, Fla. :
University of South Florida.
c May 14, 2003
Networks of schools / Robert W. McMeekin.
Arizona State University.
University of South Florida.
t Education Policy Analysis Archives (EPAA)
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
mods:mods xmlns:mods http:www.loc.govmodsv3 xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govmodsv3mods-3-1.xsd
mods:relatedItem type host
mods:identifier issn 1068-2341mods:part
mods:detail volume mods:number 11issue 16series Year mods:caption 20032003Month May5Day 1414mods:originInfo mods:dateIssued iso8601 2003-05-14
1 of 22 Education Policy Analysis Archives Volume 11 Number 16May 14, 2003ISSN 1068-2341 A peer-reviewed scholarly journal Editor: Gene V Glass College of Education Arizona State University Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the EDUCATION POLICY ANALYSIS ARCHIVES EPAA is a project of the Education Policy Studies Laboratory. Articles appearing in EPAA are abstracted in the Current Index to Journals in Education by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation and are permanently archived in Resources in Education .Networks of Schools Robert W. McMeekin Centro de Investigacin y Desarrollo de la Educaci n (CIDE) Santiago, ChileCitation: McMeekin, R. (May 14, 2003). Networks of schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11 (16). Retrieved [date] from http://epaa.asu.edu/epa a/v11n16/.AbstractThe study proposes: (1) that the institutional clim ate in schools, which includes formal rules, informal rules, mechanisms f or enforcing both kinds of rules, clear objectives and an atmosphere of coo peration and trust, has a strong influence on school performance; (2) that Â“n etworksÂ” of schools such as the Accelerated Schools Project in the U.S. and the Fe y Alegra schools in Latin America help improve school performance in a variety of ways, and have been successful in providing good education to disadvantaged children; and (3) that one of the reasons some networks are s uccessful is that they promote the creation of sound institutional environ ments in member schools. The argument draws on New Institutional Economics a nd especially on the role of institutions inside school organizations in reducing agency problems
2 of 22and facilitating transactions between actors in sch ool communities. Three examples of networks with a specific orientation to ward improving equityÂ—the Matte Schools of Santiago, Chile, the Fe y Alegra schools in multiple Latin American countries, and the Accelera ted Schools Project in the U.S.Â—are presented and analyzed in terms of how they influence intra-organizational institutions.IntroductionAmid all the debate about how to improve educationÂ— the controversies over vouchers, charter schools, reward-based incentives, standards and accountabilityÂ—a modest but often successful approach to increasing school performanc e has been all but overlooked. I refer to Â“networksÂ” of schools that offer distinctive approa ches to providing education, and that operate in both the public and private spheres. Exa mples in the U.S. include Robert SlavinÂ”s Success for All model, Theodore SizerÂ’s Coalition o f Essential Schools, the Edison Project (a private education management organization or EMO ), the Accelerated Schools Project, initiated by Henry Levin and now a nationwide movem ent, and others. In Latin America the Fe y Alegra schools operated by the Jesuit Order i n many countries of the region offer a well-known and admired example. In Chile the school s operated by the Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria (Society for Primary Instructi on, SIP) provide another example on a relatively small scale.Like some charter schools, there are networks that have been established with the explicit purpose of offering children who are Â“at riskÂ” (hav e a high probability of failing or dropping out) an opportunity to obtain a good education. The se networks appear to perform better than schools serving the same student populations b ut that are not members of the networks. Most networks provide a kind of yardstick or basis for comparison with regular public schools, although their main objective goes well be yond creating competitive pressures. They may be publicly financed or private, but even those that are public are to some degree outside the main bureaucracy of the education syste ms in which they operate. Although specifics vary, the schools in the networks must co mply with certain minimum essential conditions (non-discrimination, for example) but ha ve fairly wide latitude regarding curriculum, teaching methods, teacher recruitment a nd selection and school management. Why are networks of schools more than ordinarily su ccessful, even when they often serve disadvantaged students and when, as research has es tablished, their costs are not significantly greater than those of other schools? Does being part of such a network confer advantages on participating schools and, if so, wha t are those advantages? A conceptual model, developed in the course of research in Chile and applying New Institutional Economics to school management issues, suggests som e reasons. School organizations that have internal Â“institutionsÂ”Â—formal rules, informal rules and enforcement mechanismsÂ—that are conducive to making and upholdi ng agreements and commitments tend to perform well according to various criteria. Networks tend to promote (or protect) favorable internal institutional climates, as elabo rated further below. Schools in which Â“the rules of the gameÂ” make it possible for teachers an d other actors to interact with confidence and cooperation provide contexts in which pedagogic al inputs can operate effectively. Some networks promote their own particular pedagogical a pproaches, which obviously have an influence on student learning. For the purposes of this study, however, pedagogical factors are left aside, as part of Â“other things being equa lÂ”. We are concerned here with the institutional environment in the school and the way being a member of a network helps
3 of 22schools to develop and maintain good internal insti tutions. The following sections consider the nature of institutions and networks in turn.What do we mean by institutions inside school organ izations?As Nobel laureate Douglass C. North defines the ter m, institutions are Â“the rules of the gameÂ”. They include the complexes of formal and inf ormal rules and constraints that apply in every social setting, and mechanisms for enforci ng each kind of rules. They Â“reduce uncertainty by providing a structure to everyday li fe. They are a guide to human interactionÂ” (North, 1990, p. 3-4). A good example of this way o f using the term institutions is Â“the institution of marriageÂ”. Marriage is in some ways an economic contract, in other ways a religious sacrament, and in still other ways a set of legal rules governing property, children and matters such as insurance, taxes, rules of inhe ritance and so on. It is founded on and upheld by a rich complex of laws and formal rules, which can be enforced by courts, but also by long-established social norms and traditions and by the powerful influences based on the approval or disapproval of families, friends and th e local culture. It is this broad-brush meaning of institutions that is used here.A set of institutions that reduces uncertainty make s it possible for people to enter into transactions with each other. These include formal transactions such as purchase and sale of goods and services, as well as highly informal tran sactionsÂ—arrangements, agreements, commitments or Â“dealsÂ”Â—whereby one person undertake s to do something with a reasonably high degree of confidence that the other party will follow through on their part of the transaction. When someone contracts with anothe r person to do somethingÂ—when a principal enters into an agreement with an agentÂ—th ere are costs. If there is not a well-functioning set of institutions, these agency costs can be very high. People do not have the security to enter into transactions without exe rcising great caution to keep from being cheated and incurring expenses of gathering informa tion about the other party, writing and monitoring detailed contracts, paying for security or insurance and so on. If there are not sufficient safeguards, or if the costs of protectin g oneÂ’s interests are too high to make the transaction worthwhile, then activities that would otherwise have been useful and profitable for all parties do not get done.The main literature on economic institutions has fo cused on their role at the macro level, in national economies or in major markets such as secu rities or commodities markets. This literature has established that institutions have a powerful effect on the costs of transactions and on economic performance. But institutions exist at an extreme micro level as well, inside organizations. There has been some study of institutions at this level. The work of Michael Jensen and William Meckling in the manageri al economics literature deals in part with Â“the rules of the gameÂ” inside organizations ( Jensen, 1998). Harvey LeibensteinÂ’s concept of Â“X-efficiencyÂ”, especially his later wor k in Beyond Economic Man (1976) and Inside the Firm (1987) delves deeply into the determinants of effi ciency inside organizations. Political scientist Gary Miller (199 2) examines in depth the varieties of prisonerÂ’s dilemma situations that tend to arise in virtually any organizational structure or incentive scheme.The theoretical framework used here to explore the role of networks of schools is based on the concept of institutions inside school organizat ions and how they influence performance. Schools constitute a large category of organization s, they tend to be organized along very similar lines and to have similar inputs and proces ses, yet their performance can vary
4 of 22greatly. There has been very little work on how ins titutions function inside schools (Rowan & Miskel, 1999, pp. 378-380).When looking at institutions at this extreme micro level, it is feasible to add to the basic list of Â“formal rules, informal rules and enforcement me chanismsÂ” two other factors that shape a schoolÂ’s institutional climate. The first is clarit y of objectives, including both how clearly the objectives are articulated and how well they ar e understood, agreed upon and internalized by members of the school community. Th e second additional component of the institutional climate is the degree of trust, coope rativeness or Â“social capitalÂ” that obtains in the school community. These five components of an i nstitutional climate, which are measurable, constitute a syndrome; a combination of factors that work together to influence performance. In economic terms a good set of instit utions reduces principal-agent problems and the costs of transacting, thus making it feasib le for beneficial transacting to take place. For a fuller explanation of this theoretical framew ork and the economic concepts that underlie it, as well as a description of an empiric al study that measured institutions in primary schools in Chile, see McMeekin (2003).The basic hypothesis of the theory is that, other t hings being equal, the more a schoolÂ’s institutional climate facilitates transactions betw een members of a schoolÂ’s community, the better the schoolÂ’s performance. Â“GoodÂ” institution s make it possible for teachers, students, parents and other members of the community to perfo rm their respective tasks effectively. On the other hand, the lack of sound institutions c an make it impossible for good inputsÂ—even the best pedagogical methods and materi alsÂ—to function as they should.Three Examples of Networks of SchoolsMy colleagues at the Centro de Investigacin y Desa rrollo de la Educacin (CIDE) and I became interested in networks through our study of primary schools in greater Santiago, Chile (McMeekin, Latorre. & Celedn, 2001). The pri vate subsidized schools studied in the course of that research are all members of a 17-sch ool network established and operated by the Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria (SIP) and best known as the Â“Matte SchoolsÂ”. Another source of interest in networks was a major study, c onducted by John Swope and Marcela Latorre at CIDE, of the Fe y Alegra schools in nin e Latin American countries (Swope & Latorre, 2000). Thus the study team at CIDE was ale rted to the subject of networks and aware that they offered advantages to member school s in terms of fostering sound internal institutional environments. Through published sourc es as well as friendship and discussions over the years with Henry M. Levin, founder of the Accelerated Schools Project (ASP), I have learned enough about that project to recognize similarities between ASP and the other two networks, although superficially they may seem quite different. One factor these networks have in common, and one r eason for examining these three, is that all seek to provide a decent education to chil dren who are disadvantaged. The Matte Schools were founded in the 19 th century to provid e education to children from families with Â“few resourcesÂ”. The Fe y Alegra schools are usually established to serve children in poor rural areas Â“where the pavement endsÂ”. The gui ding principle of the Accelerated Schools Project has been to provide a good educatio n to students otherwise Â“at riskÂ”. In this sense all three networks address similar challenges and have similar objectives. The following sections consider these three example s of networks of schools. They do not purport to offer in-depth analyses of each network. Their aim instead is to explore whether
5 of 22 there are common factors associated with membership in these networks that help create sound institutions and contribute to good school pe rformance. a. The Matte Schools of the Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria of Santiago The Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria was founded in 1856, before Chile had a public school system, with the aim of providing the children of f amilies with Â“few resourcesÂ” an education that would enable them to become successful, produc tive citizens. Its original slogan, at a time when 86 percent of ChileÂ’s population was illi terate, was Â“War against ignorance!Â” The SIP has been in continuous operation for nearly a c entury and a half and for much of that time the Matte family has provided strong and carin g leadership as well as substantial material contributions.There are 15 primary schools and two secondary scho ols in the SIP network, all in the greater Santiago area and intentionally located in low-income neighborhoods. The SIP schools, originally supported entirely from private contributions, were among the first to take advantage of the opportunity to become private voucher-paid schools when ChileÂ’s nationwide voucher system was established in 1980. (Roughly 90 percent of enrollment in Chile is in public and private voucher-paid schools ; the remaining ten percent is in elite paid private schools.)The SIP schools have always had co mplete autonomy to establish their own philosophy, rules, procedures, staff, and school co mmunities and the guiding spirit of the network is very strong. These are non-sectarian sch ools but, since the SIP gives great emphasis to development of values and Chile is a Ca tholic country, a Catholic influence is clearly felt.Private subsidized schools in Chile have higher per formance than municipal schools on ChileÂ”s national achievement tests called SIMCE (Si stema de Medicin de la Calidad de la Educacin). In the private subsidized subsector, th e Matte schools as a group have higher scores than the average for all private subsidized schools (SIP, Memoria, 1999 p. 16). Table 1 shows comparative scores on SIMCE tests for four categories of secondary schools in 1999. Table 1 Test Scores of Tenth Grade Students, 1999 SIMCE Test Voucher paidMunicipal Voucher paidPrivate SIP 10thGrade Elite, paidPrivate Language236254287297Mathematics237252280299 Source: Sociedad de Instruccin Prima ria (SIP), Memoria, 1999 p. 16. The SIP schoolsÂ’ performance was better than both p ublic (municipal) and private subsidized schools and almost as good as that of th e more selective and much more expensive paid private schools. Most other private subsidized schools serve upper middle class families in higher-income neighborhoods (who also self-select to attend private rather than municipal schools). The SIP schools produce hi gher performance on the SIMCE tests than their peer schools, even though the families t hey serve have lower socioeconomic status than families in other private subsidized schools. The following sections consider some of the factors that characterize the Matte Schools and contribute to their good results.
6 of 22Private status Being private clearly conveys benefits on the SIP schools, whose leaders have a clear idea of what they want to achieve. The schools in the network have freedom to establish their own Â“proyectos educativosÂ” or missi on statements (guided by the goals of the network itself, which are clearly stated and widely disseminated to member schools). The SIP chooses its own school directors (many of whom have Â“come up through the ranksÂ” as teachers and leaders in the network) and the direct ors have autonomy to select and develop their own teams of teachers. These and other charac teristics that private status conveys undoubtedly contribute to the success of schools in this network. Other private subsidized schools in Chile have the same opportunities convey ed by private status, but not all of them take advantage of them in the same way the SIP scho ols do (nor do they, in most cases, belong to networks like the SIP).The leadership role of the SIP Â“The SocietyÂ”, as teachers and directors refer to it, is the top authority to which the schools report. It provides the overall mission or goal statement for all the schools, while individual schools within the ne twork establish their own mission statements on a participatory basis. This means tha t the principal-agent relationships between the governance authority and the schools ar e very close and agency problems of asymmetric information or diverging aims are minima l within the community. Another advantage the SIP provides is continuity of governa nce; something the municipal sector lacks.Management support is provided by the network headq uarters, which relieves member schools of performing some managerial functions suc h as financial management and budgeting. It also provides guidance and knowledge about management functions, interacts with the national Ministry of Education on policy m atters and with the association of private schools, brings in up-to-date information on instru ctional and management techniques from outside the network, and provides a buffer between school-level managers and some elements of the external community that might other wise absorb time and effort. Team building The directors of member schools in the SIP networ k are chosen by the SIP, almost always from able educators who have made the ir way up from classroom teacher to middle-level leadership roles to directorship. The directors then have a high degree of autonomy in building their own teams (although a ne w director arriving at a school inherits a staff that has been carefully chosen and trained by predecessors and the SIP system). Directors put their own personal stamp on their sch ools, as was evident from our interviews with five primary school directors. They dedicate s ubstantial amounts of time to in-class observation and play active roles of professional a dvisor, constructive critic and strong supporter of their staff.Staff self-select to become teachers in the SIP net work. Many members of the focus groups of teachers with whom we met had been students at M atte schools or were the children of former students, or both. Clearly there is a powerf ul sense of mission, tradition and commitment among this staff and there is a strong f eeling of belonging to a team, of both the SIP network and of the individual school. In such a n environment, feelings of trust are strong.A substantial portion of parents who send their chi ldren to SIP schools are former Matte School students or children of former students, or both. The only selection of students the schools make is to take siblings of present student s or children of former students, but this in itself provides a filter that results in a communit y of families that understand and support the
7 of 22ideals and traditions of the SIP. The proportion of Â“legaciesÂ” varies from school to school. In some cases the neighborhoods where schools were ori ginally sited, which were chosen because they were in low-income communities, have c hanged with time and shifting demographics. Some families have also moved to othe r communities and yet still transport their children back to the older (and often poorer) neighborhood so they can attend the school.Parental involvement in this situation is more than ordinarily strong and parents understand and feel commitment to the schoolsÂ’ goals and tradi tions. To further strengthen the links between family and school, the SIP contracts with a n independent training firm to provide Â“Schools for ParentsÂ” (Escuelas para Padres) that p resent courses on parenting skills and ways to support the school by encouraging children to do their best. Taking all these factors into account, the communit y feeling in schools in the SIP network is very strong. It appears to correspond to what Bryk, Lee and Holland (1993) have observed concerning Â“communityÂ” in Catholic schools. In scho ol communities such as those described here, relationships between principals an d agents are positive rather than conflictive, levels of uncertainty are low, and the re are low risks or costs involved in entering into transactionsÂ—between teachers and stu dents, between peers, and other pairingsÂ—having to do with accomplishing clearly-st ated goals. The environments facilitate transactions between members of the school communit y. Guidance regarding rules The SIP has its own set of rules or Reglamento In terno covering working conditions of all staff, professional advan cement for teachers, directors and other senior staff, rules regarding security and risks af fecting personnel and students, provisions for sanctions in the event of violation of the rule s and related matters (Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria, 1998). All are expressly in a ccordance with Chilean labor law. These general rules are binding on schools within the net work, but each individual school has its own Reglamento that deals in greater detail with ru les regarding academic matters, relations between parents and the school, and responsibilitie s of each category of members in the school community. Members of each school community are given copies of the relevant Reglamento and parents are required to sign written statements each year attesting that they have read the rules and agreeing to abide by them a nd uphold their parental responsibilities. The Society also plays a role, through written docu ments such as the mission statement as well as through other communication channels such a s training and periodic inspections, in establishing and reinforcing the informal rules tha t apply throughout the network. The member schools also place heavy emphasis on establi shing the norms of academic and personal behavior that teachers, students and all m embers of the community are expected to respect. In the informal sphere, the presence of th ese rules is felt as much or more through positive recognition of good performance (based not only on grades but also on being Â“best friendÂ”, Â“most improved this monthÂ”, or Â“teacher of the monthÂ”) as through negative sanctions. And in addition to explicit recognition in a variety of frequent ceremonies, teachers and directors emphasized the role played b y Â“conversationÂ” in providing guidance, encouragement and correction of behavior and perfor mance where necessary. Social capital and a climate of trust Repeatedly we heard school directors and teachers in focus groups mention that being part of the SIP net work provides a sense of security, like being part of a Â“familyÂ”. The SocietyÂ’s long histor y and traditions contribute strongly to this, as does its emphasis on values and teamwork. Teache rs inside the system may have specific disagreements with each other, with the director or some aspect of the SocietyÂ’s system, and
8 of 22directors may need to correct some aspect of a teac herÂ’s performance, but we were told that these things are worked out through Â“conversationÂ”, in an amicable manner, within a system of rules and procedures that all parties trust. Whe n asked about how the system deals with teachers who are not performing well, teachers repl ied, Â“They know if they donÂ’t fit in. After a while they go away.Â”One of the themes among the values the SIP schools seek to teach is teamwork and cooperative behavior. And one of the explicitly rec ognized means of teaching values is through modeling, in which school directors and tea chers engage actively. The formal and informal rules serve to establish an environment wh ere all members feel secure, agency problems are minimal and transaction costs are low. While there is a strong sense of discipline, this is maintained through moral pressu re and carefully managed so that individuals are not shamed or hurt.Because the directors and teachers tend to progress through their careers within the system (and often are former students), they are strongly socialized into the SIP system of values. There is agreement and consistency in the education al communities. Having the Society as an umbrella organization shelters the school from s hifting influences from external sources. Material benefits The SIP provides network management and leadershi p functions that relieve its schools of some administrative burdens. There are also services, especially teacher training and evaluation and activities such as Â“schools for parentsÂ”, that are provided centrally. The SocietyÂ’s staff is well informed abo ut the findings of educational research and best practice throughout Latin America and the worl d, and make this information available to the individual schools, which would otherwise no t have access to it. It is a source of guidance and wise advice for its member schools.By far the largest share of income comes from the g overnment via various categories of transfer payments, the largest being the subvention s or vouchers. The second largest source of income is payments by parents through the system of shared financing or Â“financiamiento compartidoÂ” that operates in 11 of the 17 schools. Contributions from the Society itself (members of the Board and senior staff are required to make contributions) and donations from third parties help fill the gap between income and expenses. The Society manages its funds centrally and allocat es them between schools in the network. It has also been instrumental in arranging for shar ed financing in those schools where parents have agreed to this measure, and in raising funds from private donors. b. The Fe y Alegra schools of Latin AmericaThe Fe y Alegra (FYA) network was founded by Jesui t Father Jos Mara Vlaz in Venezuela in 1955. It now operates in fourteen coun tries of Latin America plus Spain. The Latin American countries in which FYA operates are: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Panama, Peru, Spain and Venezuela. Some c ountry programs are quite small. The system was created to provide education to underpri vileged children. Most of the FYA schools are located in rural areas but some are in or near urban slums. In each country a National Office coordinates the schools in its netw ork and these national federations enjoy a high degree of autonomy. Over all coordination is p rovided by a headquarters in Venezuela. The statement of guiding principles to which all sc hools in the system adhere is the
9 of 22 International Mission Statement of FYA. Each Nation al Office develops its own mission statement, and each school within a federation has its own, locally developed mission statement. This, then, is a network of networks.The schoolsÂ’ main aim is to reduce the high levels of repetition and dropouts that plague education in most Latin American countries. They st rive to provide a good education and to assure that students complete at least the basic cy cle of schooling. Student retention in school is the main indicator of performance, since most countries of the region lack standardized tests that would make it possible to e valuate schools on the basis of test scores. The FYA network is notably successful in reducing r epetition and dropouts. The CIDE study of FYA in nine countries showed that in a majority of countries, FYA schools serving poor children achieved better results than the national averages for all public schools in terms of Â“opportune progressÂ” (meaning completing the primar y cycle within the expected number of years), lower repetition rates, lower definitive dr opout rates and higher overall student retention rates (Swope & Latorre, 2000, pp. 102-114 ). Retention rates for girls were higher than for boys in FYA schools. Table 2 shows gross r epetition rates and cohort dropout rates for FYA schools and averages for other public schoo ls in nine Latin American countries. Table 2 Comparison of Repetition and Dropout Rates in FYA Schools and other Public Schools in Nine Countries of Latin America Gross Repetition Rates*Gross Dropout Rates** CountryFYAPublic SchoolsFYAPublic Schools Peru25.4332.489.8625.72Bolivia20.3572.889.0026.80Venezuela22.0340.2416.1838.65Nicaragua24.0739.1113.7510.00Ecuador7.2112.8029.2038.60Guatemala20.4918.0422.3038.20Colombia21.3319.2110.508.00El Salvador29.0320.2039.7040.40Paraguay27.4433.888.375.00* Traditional gross grade repetition rates, equal t o the accrued number of repeating students register ed by a cohort as a percentage of enrollment in the co hortÂ’s beginning year. ** Includes dropouts from all causes including, for example, moving away. Source: Swope & Latorre (2000), pp. 104-105.Recall that the FYA schools, intentionally located in poor rural areas, are compared here with the average for all primary schools in their c ountries. FYA schools are both public and private. The propor tions vary from country to country but a majority of FYA schools are public in every country In most countries the schools enjoy a
10 of 22high degree of autonomy, even though they operate w ith public funding and under public control. This autonomy is not always fully respecte d but when it is, it enables the National Offices to choose their own school directors and te ams of teachers, without interference from the state or teachersÂ’ unions, and to keep tea chers from being transferred out of the schools unless they choose to go (Codina, 1994, p. 333). Autonomy gives FYA schools a chance to build their own staff, which leads to lik e-minded teams, committed to the same goals. This in turn tends to reduce agency problems and the transaction costs involved in making agreements within the team, including betwee n directors and staff and between peers.The CIDE study found that the FYA schools do not di ffer substantially from public schools and that they are Â“a more efficient type of public schoolÂ” (Swope & Latorre, 2000, p. 159). The main source of funding for FYA schools is gover nment transfers to cover teacher salaries, which is by far the largest expenditure i tem for basic education. But in order to provide additional expenditures for textbooks and t eaching materials, teacher training and (whenever possible) for educational innovations, it is necessary to raise funds from other sources. This is done through development of small school improvement projects, which become focal points for community involvement as we ll as channels for communication between the individual schools and higher levels in the FYA organization. The international and national offices of FYA help schools prepare pr ojects and present them to donors for financing. Projects are thus both a source of addit ional financing and a means of forging stronger links between the school, its community an d the network. What are the reasons FYA schools achieve better stu dent retention than their essentially similar public counterparts? The affiliation with t he Catholic Church and the mystique and charisma that this provides is undoubtedly a factor as is the high degree of autonomy mentioned above. Pedagogical inputs are also import ant (although the network encourages schools to develop their own models and philosophie s of education in consultation with parents and the community). It is clear, however, t hat the network provides an overall vision or set of objectives as well as management practice s that promote the development of a desirable institutional climate in its member schoo ls. Such an institutional environment makes it easier for members of school communities t o enter into the kinds of informal transactions that contribute to effective teaching and studying and good performance. Mission and objectives The international mission of FYA plays a powerful role in shaping the schools in the network. The mission statement h elps explain the networkÂ’s aims and convince communities to invite FYA to establish a s chool in their neighborhood. As Swope and Latorre (2000) emphasize, the language of the m ission statement is Â“value ladenÂ” and Â“aimed at spreading an almost missionary messageÂ” ( p.26). Examples of emotive language include: Popular education movement Commitment Construction of a more fraternal and fair society Educational action and social advancement Option for the poor Reach the poorest sectors of our cities Quest for a more equitable world A child without a school is everyoneÂ’s problem Fe y Alegra starts where the pavement ends (p. 26)
11 of 22Such evocative language, plus a single clear focus on keeping children in school, articulates the networkÂ’s objectives and helps principals and a gents understand each other, communicate effectively and bring forth the best ef forts of all members of the network and its individual school communities.Creation of a school community Local populations must invite FYA to establish a school in their neighborhood, which provides the starting poi nt for close relationships with parents and community leadership. FYA chooses its school di rectors, who then have the latitude to choose their own cadre of teachers. FYA helps provi de teacher training in its aims, techniques and methods. It also manages to reduce t eacher turnover, which is a chronic problem in schools in Latin America, especially sch ools in rural and poverty areas. Low teacher turnover further contributes to a sense of bonding and trust. (It is noteworthy that FYA does not attempt to provide economic incentives for teachers, yet teachersÂ’ commitment is very high.) These factors create feel ings of community and teamwork. Involvement of parents and the external community Once a community elects to invite FYA to establish a school, it becomes closely involved with the school. One of the key Â“student-retention strategiesÂ” FYA uses is programs to involve the community and families. Activities promoting involvement include Â“workshops Â… for parents as a way of having them gain a better understanding of the problems th at their children faceÂ”, Â“increasing awareness of the importance of educationÂ”, Â“strateg ies to get parents to support school work in the homeÂ”, Â“programmed home visitsÂ”, and Â“commun ity involvement strategies, especially those designed to involve parents in the education of their childrenÂ” (Swope & Latorre, 2000, pp. 120-121).Formal and informal rules Because there are obvious differences between the situations of FYA schools in different countries, as well as grea t diversity among schools in any one country, the FYA network does not present guideline s for formal rules in school. In general these schools, affiliated with a Catholic organizat ion, tend to be orderly and to emphasize values and cooperation. The most important role of FYA is in the area of informal rules and enforcement mechanisms, especially in the relations hips between school directors and teachers and between teachers as peers.Environment of cooperation and trust Schools in the FYA network are managed privately, although they receive public subsidy, and this faci litates establishing school communities in which teachers remain for extended periods, profess ional relationships between directors and teachers tend to be close and positive, parents are brought into contact with the school and encouraged to support it and motivate their chi ldren to study well and remain in school. FYAÂ’s strong sense of mission contributes to feelin gs of solidarity and participation in a worthy undertaking. Writing of the Â“key elements th at determine the quality and efficiency of FYAÂ”, Father Gabriel Codina, S. J., head of FYA in Bolivia, says Â“The most important thing, without question, is the sense of Â‘missionÂ’, the charisma of FYA itself and its choice and spirit of service to the poor. This provides a Â‘value addedÂ’ that is a particular characteristic of FYA in all of Latin AmericaÂ” (Cod ina, 1994, p. 344). c. The Accelerated Schools ProjectOne of the best known and most successful networks of schools in the U.S. is the Accelerated Schools Project (ASP), initiated by Hen ry M. Levin and colleagues at Stanford
12 of 22University in two pilot schools and now encompassin g over 1,000 schools in 41 U.S. states. Schools in the ASP serve student populations that w ere Â“at riskÂ” and were performing poorly before being incorporated into the network. Sixth grade students in the schools were reading one to two years below grade level when the schools opted to become Accelerated Schools. ASPÂ’s basic concept is that, in such situa tions, children need schooling that is more intensive (accelerated) than other schools rather t han Â“dumbed downÂ” because the students are below grade level in reading and math. The esse ntial aim is that, by the time students complete primary or middle school, they should be r eading and generally performing as well as (if not better than) the average for the distric t. The ASP applies techniques borrowed from schools for gifted and talented students, with the idea of providing for students at risk an education that anyone would want for their own chil dren. In most cases schools in this network are regular p ublic schools and not special or charter schools. The ASP obtains permission and support fro m the local public education authority to put its philosophy and techniques into practice (and for this to happen, the local authority must support the idea). The schools are allowed to build their own teams of personnel and to practice their own pedagogical approaches with mini mum intervention from above. Building on the experience in the Â“pioneer schoolsÂ” that were the first members of the network, the ASP has developed a philosophy based o n three principles, a set of nine values, and instructional methods called Â“powerful learning Â” that integrate curriculum, instructional techniques and organization (Finnan, St. John, McCa rthy & Slovacek, 1996, pp. 15-19, 297-301). The principles are Â“(a) unity of purpose, (b) empowerment with responsibility, and (c) building on strengthsÂ” (Finnan et al ., p. 15). The values include Â“the school as a center of expertise, equity, community, risk taking experimentation, reflection, participation, trust, and communicationÂ” (Finnan et al ., pp. 17-18). A powerful learning situation Â“is one that incorporates changes in scho ol organization, climate, curriculum, and instructional strategies to build on the strengths of students, staff and community to create optimal learning resultsÂ” (Finnan et al ., p. 18). This brief description cannot do justice to the richness of the principles, values and learning app roach that have evolved since the project began in 1989. It does, however, suggest the vision and guidance the Accelerated Schools network provides to its members, and the way the ne twork fosters strong institutions within its member schools. Detailed information on how the se overarching ideas are put into effect is found in Hopfenberg, Levin, Brunner, Chase, Chri stensen, Keller, Moore, Rodrguez and Soler (1993).Becoming an Accelerated School One of the outstanding features of the ASP is the heavy investmentÂ—especially of time, expertise of ASP sta ff and coaches, and hard work of people at the level of the school that wants to join the n etworkÂ—that precedes full membership in the project. Before schools can join the network th ere is what Finnan et al (1996, pp. 82-103) call a Â“courtship phaseÂ”, involving extensi ve introspection and the development of strong commitment on the part of all members of the school communityÂ—including the local board, school leadership and staff and parent sÂ—to the philosophy. This is one means by which the ASP achieves a high degree of agreemen t between principals and agents. Once the decision is made to join the project, a pe riod of training and preparation begins. School district officials, school staff, parents an d community members participate in preparing for the school to become an Accelerated S chool. Teachers have considerable voice and latitude to put their ideas into effect, which builds their sense of participation and their commitment to the program that emerges. The process es involved in implementing the projectÂ’s concept of Â“powerful learningÂ” create an environment in the classroom that is
13 of 22conducive to learning. Finnan and her colleagues fo und that teachers in ASP schools have a feeling Â“that collaborative practices that come abo ut as a result of the Accelerated Schools model have led to their individual professional gro wth and increased communication and sharing among colleagues. A by-product of this coll aboration and sharing of philosophy has been a greater feeling of support from peers, camar aderie, and accountability among the staff to provide a better education for all of the studen tsÂ” (p. 283). Evaluation of ASP schools Accelerated schools have generally achieved their aims of bringing students up to grade level in reading and mathematics and to levels of performance as good as or better than other schools in their di strict or area. Since their target populations are defined by being at risk, and would tend to hav e below-standard performance without the intervention of the ASP, evaluation on the basi s of test scores must be done with care, since cross-section comparison is not a valid way o f assessing the value added they provide. Scores on standardized tests do not capture the ful l range of the effects of ASP membership. These effects include not only gains in student ach ievement but also improvements in attendance rates, reductions in repetition, student suspensions and vandalism; increased parental involvement and numbers of ASP students wh o meet the criteria for traditional gifted and talented programs. A report by the New A merican Schools Corporation (NAS) summarizes findings on the effectiveness of the ASP (New American Schools, n. d.) Examples included fewer disciplinary referrals to t he school principal, increased student attendance, reduction in the number of suspensions, and decreases in numbers of students retained in their grade. In the area of family and community involvement, NAS reports that a number of Accelerated Schools experienced large inc reases in parental involvement, including participation in decision-making and volu nteer activity, as well as more student participation in community and extracurricular acti vities. There are indications that ASP schools produce good results in terms of test results. The National Center for the Accelerated Schools Project publishes information on the Â“Accomplishment of Accelerated SchoolsÂ” on its webs ite, showing that ASP schools in Ohio, Tennessee and Texas produced higher reading a nd math scores than the average for schools in the same districts where the ASP schools are located (National Center for the Accelerated Schools Project, 2000).An independent evaluation of ASP was conducted, wit h funding from The Ford Foundation, by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (Bloom, Ham, Melton, & OÂ’Brien, 2001). The MDRC study used an innovative methodolog y that compared the performance of schools in a sample during five years of implementa tion of the ASP model with base-line scores on reading and math tests during the three y ears prior to implementation and projections of what each schoolÂ’s average test scor es would have been without ASP. The study found that, after five years of implementatio n, the ASP schools in the sample had higher third-grade reading and math scores than a s et of base-line scores by a statistically significant amount.On average, the schools increased their studentsÂ’ r elative performance by 6 percentile points in reading and 7 percentile points in math during t he five-year follow-up periodÂ…. The lowest-performing schools at baseline experienced t he largest improvements in test scoresÂ” (p. 62). Â“Implementation of the Accelerated Schools reform was a difficult, time-consuming process. But schools that stuck with the reform wer e able to improve the school environment appreciably, especially with regard to organization al culture and decision-making. These environmental improvements were followed by increas es in studentsÂ’ test scores, although it was not until the fifth year after the initiative w as launched that average scores rose above
14 of 22their baseline levels by a statistically significan t amountÂ” (p. 74). The researchers are cautious not to draw too strong conclusions from their findings and spell out a number of caveats concerning the study and it s interpretation. One must bear in mind, however, that students in these schools had been pe rforming much below grade level prior to implementation of ASP, and that the program succeed ed in bringing their average scores significantly closer to regional or national averag es. The ASP and institutions in schools The first of the three principles of Accelerated SchoolsÂ—unity of purposeÂ—is closely related to clar ity of goals or the objective function, with all that implies for reducing principal-agent problems. The ASPÂ’s values of equity, community, risk taking, experimentation, reflection participation, trust, and communication reverberate strongly with the characteristics of sc hools with positive institutional environments. Requiring strong initial commitment o n the part of the local authority, school director and teachers, and parents before a school becomes a member of the ASP is consistent with clarity of goals and also has overt ones of contracting. Clearly the emphasis on community has an effect on the institutional environment of ASP schools (reminding one of the findings of Bryk, Lee and Holland about community in Catholic schools). The ASP clarifies goals, builds powerful community feeling and commitment, and promotes an atmosphere of cooperati on and trust. It has less explicit involvement in laying down formal rules than the Ma tte schools (in part because it leaves this to each school to establish for itself) but th e development of a sense of community necessarily contributes to formation of informal ru les and enforcement mechanisms. This is a different kind of network; one that transmits a p owerful ideology to its member schools and provides information, training and oversight to help them implement an effective program. The ASP philosophy creates school environm ents in which relationships between principals and agents are based on shared goals and trust. This tends to reduce uncertainty in interactions or Â“transactionsÂ” between community me mbers and makes it easier (less Â“costlyÂ” in terms of risk and uncertainty) for memb ers to enter into arrangements having to do with how much energy and effort they will expend in pursuit of their schoolÂ’s goals.Conclusions about networksThe three examples discussed above were chosen beca use of their similarities to each other, especially in their focus on equity objectives. Not all networks possess all the characteristics observed here, nor do all tend to promote positive institutional environments in the same way. On the basis of these examples, however, and i nformation on other networks, it is possible to suggest the following ways in which net works with similar, equity-oriented objectives operate to promote positive institutiona l climates within their member schools. Networks tend to have the following characteristics : Short, clear principal-agent links or relationships Network operators (who are often private groups) maintain close relationships with t he schools and provide their vision, guidance and supervision directly to the schools. T here tends to be a high degree of consensus between the networkÂ’s leadership (or oper ating authority) and the schools in the network. A strong sense of mission Networks are usually formed because some leader o r group seeks to accomplish an educational mission. Those m entioned in the sections above have all sought to improve education for children o f families in or near poverty. Such
15 of 22a mission attracts participantsÂ—whether parents, te achers or othersÂ—who agree with the mission and are committed to working toward its accomplishment. Clarity of objectives A general characteristic of networks of schools i s a set of clear objectives, which are communicated effectively to a ll members the educational communities within the network, including parents. Clear objectives (that minimize problems in principal-agent relationships) are char acteristic of schools with favorable institutional climates. Social capital The three examples of networks described above al l provide a sense of belonging to a parent organization within which the re is trust, cooperation and mutual support, and this tends to be transmitted down to t he individual schools as well. Parent and community involvement All the networks discussed give high priority to involving parents and, to varying degrees, the surr ounding community in school affairs. Parents are encouraged to support the scho olÂ’s objectives and motivate their children to study hard and make genuine effort. Consensus within the community In the process of establishing a new school, or bringing an existing school into a network, some ne tworks require that all parties to the school (including the public authority within w hich the school operates) understand and Â“buy intoÂ” the objectives and proced ures of the network. The Accelerated School Project follows a procedure wher eby it consults with members of a schoolÂ’s community over a period of up to two yea rs, during which it establishes firm commitments, before a school becomes a member. Contribution to establishing rules Networks help establish a clear set of formal rul es, and may lay down guidelines for their member school s to follow, but individual member schools usually have a high degree of autono my to clarify their own rules. In small-scale networks such as the Matte Schools, inf ormal rules seem to be communicated within the network, especially those r egarding the roles and responsibilities of teachers, parents and school di rectors. All the Matte Schools have a Â“reglamento internoÂ” or set of written rules, and p arents in this network are required to sign statements specifying that they have received the formal rules, understand them and agree to abide by them. Continuity Networks provide a degree of continuity regarding objectives, leadership, rules and pedagogical orientation, and constitute a buffer between the school and political authorities, or a stabilizing force in ti mes of political change or shifting educational fashions. They assume the role of the B oard or governing authority, and the institutional relationship between the network/ Board and the school is thus consistent and positive. Principal-agent relations between external authority and school are clear, strong and consistent. Guidance and supervision One of the benefits networks provide is sharing e xperience within the network and making information (such as up-to-date knowledge on relevant research findings or proven practice improvements) available to network members. In addition to the value of the content itself, such c ommunication tends to provide professional stimulation. The network leadership co nstitutes a respected supervisory authority. Administrative functions Some networks assume responsibility for certain administrative activities, including relationships with the next higher administrative authority, screening and hiring teachers into a poo l, central purchasing, or negotiations with unions, if this is relevant. This relieves sch ools of some administrative burdens. Evaluation of performance Networks may establish their own system of evalua ting member schools and their staff according to their o wn criteria and standards. The Matte Schools network has a carefully-designed syst em that teachers understand and
16 of 22appear to trust.Rewards and recognition Networks may establish systems of awards for good performance to individual member schools or teacher s. (Since winning teachers are chosen from throughout the network rather than from within an individual school, this form of reward does not create undesirable competit ion, distortion of behavior or resentment toward either the winners or those who c hoose them.) The rewards may be monetary but many are based only on recognition, wh ich provides an incentive many teachers value highly. Inputs of resources Most networks provide resources in the form of le adership and guidance. Some also offer curricular guidance, mate rials, training and, in some instances, material resources in money or in kind. In most cases the financial resources available are limited, but some networks are adept at raising additional funding. The characteristics of the networks examined here h ave strong parallels with: (a) the findings of several bodies of research on what make s a good school (including research on Effective Schools, Catholic schools, school culture school leadership, site-based management and parental involvement), and (b) the c haracteristics of schools with good institutional environments.Other authors have recognized the way networks can contribute to improving performance of their member schools. In a section titled Â“The I mportance of NetworksÂ”, Darling-Hammond, Ancess and Falk (1995) discuss the way in a local network in New York influences the five schools practicing authentic as sessment they describe in their book. All five are members of the Coalition of Essential Scho ols (CES) network and four of the five are also members of the Center for Collaborative Ed ucation (CCE), the New York City affiliate of CES. The authors make the following co mments about networks: While these networks have provided common ground fo r sharing practice and for exploring new possibilities, each school has in terpreted and enacted the CES principles in quite different, contextually appropr iate waysÂ… [This] underscores the importance of ensuring that practitioners inven t models Â– rather than replicate modelsÂ—that are embedded in and embody th eir knowledge of their local contextsÂ…. As a network enables practitioners to consider these issues across schooling levels, each learns important stra tegies from the other. Elementary school work is strengthened as communiti es reflect on their values and purposes, articulating their expectations for w hat students should be able to do and developing public criteria for their standar ds and expectationsÂ…. The network is a vehicle for reconsideration of practic e from many vantage points, centering around a hub of common values supporting learner-centered practice. This makes connections between like-minded practiti oners both possible and mutually profitableÂ…. it expands the possibilities for the kinds of conversations that practitioners need to have if teaching, assess ment and school structure are to be organized for school successÂ…. (Darling-Hammo nd, Ancess & Falk, 1995, pp. 266-268.) Linda Nathan and Larry Myatt (1998) find that, on t he basis of their experience managing a Â“pilot schoolÂ” within a Massachusetts school distri ct, being part of a local network of such pilot schools had benefits for school leaders. Networks are powerful tools for schools because the y provide meaningful feedback as well as greater and better accountabili ty than bureaucracies.
17 of 22Friendly, finely-tuned feedback from a number of so urces is indispensable to a good schoolÂ…. Networks of schools and educators pro vide the opportunity to grow and learn with and from others who share a cle ar purpose and whose work we know, trust and respect. Participation in our pi lot network is loose and flexible, but with appropriate degrees of critical friendship at a negotiated pace and style. Feedback from peer schools can have a to ugh edge to it and is perhaps taken more to heart because it comes from t hose who know young people and the profession firsthandÂ… Membership in a national network, such as the Coalition of Essential Schools, gives [our s chool] access not only to an invaluable template of school reorganization but al so to the voice of the practitionerÂ—with a democratic and multicultural to ne. (Nathan & Myatt, 1998, pp. 283-284.) The subject of networks is attracting increasing in terest. There are various kinds of networks, including those that provide a set of ide as or principles (such as the Coalition of Essential Schools and others), those that require s chools to adopt a specific instructional approach or model (such as Success for All), profit -making networks or EMOs such as the Edison Project and others.The statements of both Darling-Hammond, Ancess and Falk (1995) and Nathan and Myatt (1998) mention small local networks of schools that have something in common (e.g. pilot schools) that provide mutual support (including mor al and political support) and play an important role in facilitating the exchange of idea s and information between like-minded professionals. In both cases the local networks wer e part of the larger Coalition of Essential Schools network.A RAND Corporation study of the New American School s (NAS) network analyzed the performance of seven models of Â“whole-school reform Â” that had many of the characteristics of networks (Berends, Bodilly & Kirby, 2002). NAS i tself is a network of networks that provides information and a menu of alternative mode ls of restructuringÂ—as well as detailed information on model design, some funding and other inputsÂ—to schools that are seeking to reform or restructure. Once a school has decided on the model it wants to follow, NAS provides additional information, advice and other i nputs that help the school implement it. The models of whole-school reform that RAND studied were: Purpose Centered Education of Audrey Cohen College; Authentic Teaching, Learni ng and Asessment for All Schools; Co-NECT Schools; Expeditionary Learning Outward Bou nd; Modern Red Schoolhouse; National Alliance for Restructuring Education, and Roots and Wings (Berends, Bodily & Kirby, 2002, pp. 37-41). These models had some of t he characteristics of networks. They were Â“external change agentsÂ” that helped schools i mplement the models, but they did not offer the same articulation of a mission or set of objectives, nor the same sense of being part of a broader community of like-minded professionals to which Nathan and Myatt (1998) refer. Nor did they have the same kind of impact on institutions within the schools that networks such as the Matte Schools, Fe y Alegra or Accelerated Schools have. Different networks have different objectives and op erate in different ways. Lieberman and Grolnick (1966) provide a review of different types of networks, focusing on the processes involved in starting and operating networks. Their study raises a number of penetrating questions about networks and their role in creating communities in which professionals with common interests can share experiences and provide valuable information and mutual support. It illustrates the diversity of networks b ut does not analyze in depth the ways
18 of 22networks influence their member schools.Not all networks have all the characteristics of th e three equity-oriented networks this paper considers, nor do they have the same influence on i nstitutional environments within their member schools. Research on networks in general has reached guardedly positive conclusions about their ability to improve school p erformance. The three networks examined in this paper appear to help their member schools to perform as well as or better than other schools in their jurisdictions and to pr ovide disadvantaged children with a better education than they would otherwise obtain. This pa per argues that one way they do this is through their influence on institutions within scho ols. The conceptual framework of institutions and their influence on school performance, described briefly in Section B above, helps explain the benefits of network membership. These three networks provide examples of how promot ing strong institutions within schools can improve the education of disadvantaged children Both subjectsÂ—networks and institutions in schoolsÂ—deserve further study.AcknowledgementThe author wishes to thank the Spencer Foundation f or support for developing the model presented here and research on the Matte Schools ne twork, Patricia Matte and personnel of the Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria, John Swope, M arcela Latorre and two anonymous referees.ReferencesBerends, M., Bodilly, S. J., & Kirby, S. N. (2002). Facing the new challenges of whole-school reform: New American Schools after a d ecade Washington: RAND Corporation. Bloom, H. S., Ham, S., Melton, L. & OÂ’Brien, J. (20 01) Evaluating the Accelerated Schools approach: A look at early implementation and impact s on student achievement in eight elementary schools New York and Oakland, CA: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. Retrieved from: www.mdrc.org/reports2001/AcceleratedSchools/accScho ols-overview.htm Bryk, A., Lee, V., & Holland, P. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Codina, G. (S.J.) (1994). Â‘La experiencia de Fe y A legraÂ’, in Gajardo, M. (ed), Cooperacin internacional y desarrollo de la educacin. Santiago: Agencia de Cooperacin Internacional de Chile. Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, L. J. & Falk, B. (1995 ). Authentic assessment in action New York: Teachers College Press. Finnan, C., St. John, E. P., McCarthy, J., & Slovac ek, S. P. (1996). Accelerated Schools in action: Lessons from the field Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Hopfenberg, W. S., Levin, H. M., Brunner, I., Chase C., Christensen, S. G., Keller, B, M., Moore, M., Rodrguez, G. & Soler, P. (1993). The Accelerated Schools resource guide
19 of 22San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Jensen, M. C. (1998). Foundations of organizational strategy Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Leibenstein, H. (1976). Beyond economic man Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Leibenstein, H. (1987). Inside the firm Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lieberman, A. & Grolnick, M. (1996). Networks and r eform in American education. Teachers College Record 98 (1), 7-45. McMeekin, R. (2003). Incentives to improve education: A new perspective Cheltenham, UK & Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. McMeekin, R., Latorre. M. & Celedn, F. (2001). Ins titutions within School Organizations: Looking Inside the Black Box. Portland, Oregon: ERI C Clearinghouse on Educational Management, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED453571. Miller, G. (1992). Managerial Dilemmas Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Nathan, L. & Myatt, L. (1998). A journey toward aut onomy. Phi Delta Kappan 80 (4), 278-286. National Center for the Accelerated Schools Project (November, 2000). Accomplishments of accelerated schools. Retrieved from: http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~wwwasp/research/accomplishm ents.htm New American Schools (n. d.) How Can We Help? Accel erated Schools Project. Retrieved from: www.naschools.org/contentViewer:asp?highlightID=48& catID=183 North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic per formance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Rowan, B. & Miskel, C. B. (1999). Institutional the ory and the study of educational organizations. In J. Murphy and K. S. Louis (eds.) Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 359-383). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Swope, J. (S.J) & Latorre, M. (2000). Fe y alegra schools in Latin America: Educational communities where the pavement ends Santiago: Centro de Investigacin y Desarrollo de la Educacin (CIDE). Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria de Santiago (1998) Reglamento Interno Santiago: Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria. Sociedad de Instruccin Primaria de Santiago (1999) Memoria, 1999 (annual report of the Society). Santiago: Sociedad de Instruccin Primari a.About the AuthorRobert McMeekin
20 of 22 Centro de Investigacin y Desarrollo de la Educaci n Santiago, ChileEmail: email@example.com Robert McMeekin is retired from the World Bank and lives in Chile. He is an Investigador Asociado with the Centro de Investigacin y Desarro llo de la Educacin in Santiago and serves as a consultant to the UNESCO Regional Offic e for Education and other organizations. He holds a doctorate and a Masters i n Public Administration from Harvard, a Masters in International Relations from the Univers ity of Kentucky and a BA fromYale. A member of the International Society for New Institu tional Economics (ISNIE), his book applying NIE concepts to study incentives to improv e education has recently appeared. The World Wide Web address for the Education Policy Analysis Archives is epaa.asu.edu Editor: Gene V Glass, Arizona State UniversityProduction Assistant: Chris Murrell, Arizona State University General questions about appropriateness of topics o r particular articles may be addressed to the Editor, Gene V Glass, firstname.lastname@example.org or reach him at College of Education, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 8 5287-2411. The Commentary Editor is Casey D. Cobb: email@example.com .EPAA Editorial Board Michael W. Apple University of Wisconsin David C. Berliner Arizona State University Greg Camilli Rutgers University Linda Darling-Hammond Stanford University Sherman Dorn University of South Florida Mark E. Fetler California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Gustavo E. Fischman California State UniveristyÂ–Los Angeles Richard Garlikov Birmingham, Alabama Thomas F. Green Syracuse University Aimee Howley Ohio University Craig B. Howley Appalachia Educational Laboratory William Hunter University of Ontario Institute ofTechnology Patricia Fey Jarvis Seattle, Washington Daniel Kalls Ume University Benjamin Levin University of Manitoba Thomas Mauhs-Pugh Green Mountain College Les McLean University of Toronto Heinrich Mintrop University of California, Los Angeles Michele Moses Arizona State University Gary Orfield Harvard University
21 of 22 Anthony G. Rud Jr. Purdue University Jay Paredes Scribner University of Missouri Michael Scriven University of Auckland Lorrie A. Shepard University of Colorado, Boulder Robert E. Stake University of IllinoisÂ—UC Kevin Welner University of Colorado, Boulder Terrence G. Wiley Arizona State University John Willinsky University of British ColumbiaEPAA Spanish Language Editorial BoardAssociate Editor for Spanish Language Roberto Rodrguez Gmez Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico firstname.lastname@example.org Adrin Acosta (Mxico) Universidad de Guadalajaraadrianacosta@compuserve.com J. Flix Angulo Rasco (Spain) Universidad de Cdizfelix.email@example.com Teresa Bracho (Mxico) Centro de Investigacin y DocenciaEconmica-CIDEbracho dis1.cide.mx Alejandro Canales (Mxico) Universidad Nacional Autnoma deMxicocanalesa@servidor.unam.mx Ursula Casanova (U.S.A.) Arizona State Universitycasanova@asu.edu Jos Contreras Domingo Universitat de Barcelona Jose.Contreras@doe.d5.ub.es Erwin Epstein (U.S.A.) Loyola University of ChicagoEepstein@luc.edu Josu Gonzlez (U.S.A.) Arizona State Universityjosue@asu.edu Rollin Kent (Mxico)Universidad Autnoma de Puebla firstname.lastname@example.org Mara Beatriz Luce (Brazil)Universidad Federal de Rio Grande do Sul-UFRGSlucemb@orion.ufrgs.brJavier Mendoza Rojas (Mxico)Universidad Nacional Autnoma deMxicojaviermr@servidor.unam.mxMarcela Mollis (Argentina)Universidad de Buenos Airesmmollis@filo.uba.ar Humberto Muoz Garca (Mxico) Universidad Nacional Autnoma deMxicohumberto@servidor.unam.mxAngel Ignacio Prez Gmez (Spain)Universidad de Mlagaaiperez@uma.es Daniel Schugurensky (Argentina-Canad)OISE/UT, Canadadschugurensky@oise.utoronto.ca Simon Schwartzman (Brazil)American Institutes for ResesarchÂ–Brazil(AIRBrasil) email@example.com
22 of 22 Jurjo Torres Santom (Spain)Universidad de A Coruajurjo@udc.es Carlos Alberto Torres (U.S.A.)University of California, Los Angelestorres@gseisucla.edu