RUTTER, MICHAEL. School Effects on Pupil Progress: Research Findings and Policy Implications. CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1983, 54, 1-29. Some of the differences in conclusions on whether schooling influences pupil progress have stemmed from the use of difference concepts of school "effects." These are reviewed in terms of the proportion of the variance accounted for, the reduction of inequality, and the raising of standards. It is argued that multiple indicators of school effectiveness are required; these should include scholastic attainment, classroom behavior, absenteeism, attitudes to learning, continuation in education, employment, and social functioning. The methodological issues inherent in the determination of school effects in raising standards are reviewed, with an emphasis on the need to control for variations in intake and to determine whether the differences among schools in pupil outcome are attributable to measured features of the schools themselves. It is concluded that there are important school effects that probably represent causal influences. The school features that might be responsible for beneficial effects on pupil progress are reviewed in terms of resources and physical plant, size of school and class, organizational structure, composition of student body, degree of academic emphasis, classroom management, discipline and pupil conditions, pupil participation and responsibility, and staff organization. The policy implications that stem from the research findings are considered.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/1129857.pdf

School Effects on Pupil Progress: Research Findings and Policy Implications.

s do not always include full details on some aspects of the study, the overall results are usually reported. Dissertations are included here which contained measurements of both self concept and academic achievement variables, after an attempted educational innovation. Each dissertation also had to include comparison between one or more groups of students who received the intervention program, and other students who did not, although these groups were not always randomly selected. With these criteria, a total of eighteen dissertations were located which evaluated programs ranging from "activity centered" education for first-graders to Personal Growth Groups as a compensatory education component for college freshmen (Beckum, 1973; Bradford, 1973; Hale, 1973; Hopke, 1975; Jones, 1975; Kalunian, 1975; Kenemuth, 1975; Kosensky, 1975; Lawson, 1974; McGinnis, 1972; Mendenhall, 1974; Mynatt, 1973; Pine, 1975; Pokipala, 1975; Poudrier, 1976; J.A. Smith, 1975; M. Smith, 1971; Zirkel, 1972). The effects reported by these studies are strikingly simple to summarize: in no case were changes in achievement unambiguously associated with changes in self concept. None of these educational programs showed measurable effects on all target groups' self concept scores while at the same time increasing academic achievement. Only two studies found positive changes on both variables for even part of their target population. Lawson's (1974) study of "non-graded" versus "graded" schools for pupils in their first, third, or fifth year of schooling found higher reading achievement for the non-graded schools at all three levels and higher self concept scores in the same schools only for the fifth year students. Self concept change here appears to be an outcome of reading success rather than an intervening variable. Bradford (1973), comparing one school with an Individually Guided Education program with a "control" school having self contained structure, found significantly greater gain scores in the experimental school on both self concept and arithmetic achievement, but not reading achievement. Few details are available for this study, but the use of only one school for each type of program confounds the potential program effects with other possible differences between the schools. The questionably positive results from these two studies thus do not overcome the main thrust of the pattern of negative results in all other studies. Further, a close examination of the results reveals that most interventions produced some effects on either self concept or achievement, but not both. Ten studies (Bradford, 1973; Hopke, 1975; Jones, 1975; Kalunian, 1975; Kosensky, 1975; Lawson, 1974; McGinnis, 1972; Pine, 1975; M. Smith, 1971; Zirkel, 1972) found significant effects on their self concept measures. Not surprisingly, these studies were mainly those emphasizing an activity or child-centered program, along with several vocational education programs for teenagers, which may also be more "activity" centered. Seven studies (Beckum, 1973; Hopke, 1975; Kenemuth, 1975; Lawson, 1974; Mynatt, 1973; Poudrier, 1976; J. A. Smith, 1975) produced effects on achievement variables. In several of these, the differences favored "control" groups with "traditional" or academic oriented programs, (Hopke, 1975; Poudrier, 1976), or resulted from tutoring programs (Beckum, 1973; Kenemuth, 1975). Thus, the lack of evidence in these dissertations for a connection between self concept 139 SCHEIRER & KRAUT This content downloaded from 157.55.39.111 on Sat, 17 Sep 2016 06:00:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH and achievement should not be attributed to totally inadequate measuring instruments, nor to failure to implement the intended programs, since the programs did produce some measurable results. Discussion: Analysis by Self Concept Theories As has become evident, these evaluations of educational interventions have generally failed to find an association between self concept change and academic achievement. Reasons for the lack of such association can be grouped into four categories: 1) methodological problems with the study design and types of data collected, 2) practical implementation problems such that the intended intervention was not actually taking place, 3) theoretical problems with the specification of the processes by which enhanced self concept might influence academic achievement, and 4) an erroneous basic theory, such that self concept is not a viable mechanism for enhancing academic achievement. Each of these will be considered briefly in this section. Methodological Problems Criticisms of social action evaluations that have failed to find effects often focus on the methodological weakness of a specific study, such as the barrage of commentary which followed the Westinghouse-Ohio University Head Start evaluation (Campbell & Erlebacher, 1970; Smith & Bissell, 1970). As this paper has frequently noted, methodological problems are endemic in this type of research and frequently contribute to the difficulty of interpreting each individual study. Adequate control groups were not always available, particularly in the larger scale programs, although randomized assignment was often present in the dissertation research. Outcome measures were sometimes inappropriate for the treatment undertaken, as when IQ tests, usually viewed as assessing underlying academic abilities, were used in programs emphasizing increasing the child's motivations for academic achievement. Further, Wylie's (1974) recent review of self concept measures concluded that no well-constructed, well-validated measuring instruments are yet available, particularly for self concept in young children. The failure to find self concept changes in the programs reviewed here was often attributed by their analysts to inadequate measurement in this affec-

Increasing Educational Achievement Via Self Concept Change

This paper explores the potential role of family socioeconomic factors in school achievement outcomes at two separate periods in the lifecourse-early in childhood and during late adolescence. Using data from an 18-year longitudinal study of families and their children which provides measures of parental socioeconomic characteristics across this entire period, we examine several issues related to the influence of early and late family factors on achievement outcomes assessed during the period of the completion of secondary schooling. We examine the extent to which differing conclusions are reached through the use of parental socioeconomic variables assessed during these two periods, and we explore the question of the relative impact of these two sets of influences. Our results indicate that, in part due to the intertemporal consistency of some socioeconomic variables, most relationships are quite similar using either the early or later variables. While these patterns make it very difficult in some instances to ascertain the relative effects of early and late socioeconomic factors, our analytic results point to a potentially stronger role of early socioeconomic factors in cognitive development and school learning. In a single instance-the case offamily size-we find independent effects on school achievement from both early and late socioeconomic experiences. A central theme in the literature on social stratification, from classical sociological writ

Family origins and the schooling process: early versus late influence of parental characteristics*

Master status individuals are persons whose physical appearance, behavior, or life circumstance is statistically unusual and centrally defining. In three studies, undergraduates indicated the dissimilarity among various master status groups (e.g., amputees, musical prodigies, criminals, royalty) and then rated them on semantic differential scales (e.g., good-bad, safe-dangerous, alluring-repelling). Multidimensional scaling revealed that few dimensions are needed to distinguish among these marginal individuals. The most common distinctions are evaluative connotation and visibility of the master status characteristic. It was also found that, as a group, those who are culturally stigmatized are far more differentiated than those who are culturally valued.

Dimensions of Marginality: Distinctions among those Who are Different

This article reviews previous research regarding teachers’ dislike of creative children. Also discussed is more recent work regarding the differences between teachers’ concepts of creativity and traditional views of creativity and how these differences may help to explain some of the apparent contradictions between previous research findings of teachers’ dislike of creative children and teachers’ own self‐reports that they enjoy working with creative children. This work indicates that teachers may be recognizing and responding to a subset of well‐mannered creative children (referred to as the “briefcase” children), but may fail to recognize the talents of less conforming creative students (the “bohemians"). The implications for the education of creatively gifted children are discussed.

In search of the wild bohemian: Challenges in the identification of the creatively gifted

Education of the disadvantaged : a book of readings

In Part I (May, 1986), Dr. Goldberg discussed egalitarianism vs excellence from an historical perspective and provided a context for the definition and assessment of giftedness and talent. Part II explores three additional issues: (a) criteria for judging the appropriateness of special programs for the gifted and talented; (b) organizational alternatives for content development and delivery; and (c) staffing programs for the gifted and talented. Following the exposition and discussion of all of the issues, the material is summarized in the form of questions and proposed areas of research and study.

Issues in the Education of Gifted and Talented Children. Part I.

STIMULATION for more widespread discovery and development of talent in our schools comes from at least two sources: a concern that the great effort to provide educational opportunities for all children and youth has left serious gaps in pro· visions for those with special potential, and a belief that any neglect of the talented represents a loss in manpower and leadership which we cannot afford in these critical times. Schools have become increasingly sensitive to the crucial role they are expected to play in this stepped.up talent search. Having been made aware of the possible limits of our talent resources and of the vital need to seek out youngsters who possess outstanding abilities, schools throughout the nation are facing up to the challenge.

Miriam L. Goldberg

Papers

Education of the disadvantaged : a book of readings

Issues in the Education of Gifted and Talented Children. Part I.

The Talented Youth Project: A Progress Report 1962:

Bright underachievers : studies of scholastic underachievement among intellectually superior high school students

Bright Under-Achievers