Impact of whole school reform on instructional program coherence in middle schools

The New Jersey Abbott v Burke (1998), ruling mandated that all Abbott schools select and implement a comprehensive school reform program. Since the mandate in 1998, little is known about the success of this Whole School Reform and its impact on program coherence in Abbott middle schools. Abbot districts were identified as special needs districts. These school districts were classified as urban with low socio-economic status; past failure to provide a thorough and efficient education; evidence of excessive taxation; and a large number of students of color, with limited, if any, prospects of higher education. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors that were indicators of strong program coherence, and whether these factors contributed to school improvement and student achievement. The participants were selected from one New Jersey Abbott school district, serving students in selected Grades 5-8, 7-8, or 6-8. Improving Chicago High Schools Teacher/Principal Survey was used to gather information from administrators (n=6) and teachers (n=140). Additional data were gathered from school demographics that may have influenced student achievement. This study used information from principal interviews as a way to ascertain each school's level of improvement and overall district improvement. In addition, the study identified factors that impeded or enhanced school improvement. Data collected from interviews were reported qualitatively. Survey data and demographics were quantified. Overall, results of the Pearson correlation analysis showed that coordination of curriculum, instruction, and learning materials within and across the different grade levels had a positive relationship with little, if any, statistical significance in regard to math achievement. Second, correlation results revealed no statistically significant relationship to literacy achievement. Third, factors that contributed to the prevention of instructional program coherence included: (a) pressure to get test scores up quickly, (b) high rates of teacher/student mobility, (c) leadership in transition, (d) variations of teacher quality, and (e) social problems stemming from the community. Finally, the correlation coefficients found that strong positive and statistically significant relationships existed between leadership behaviors and program coherence factors.