Skip to main content

Getting Beyond the “One Best System”?

Developing Alternative Approaches to Instruction in the United States

  • Chapter

Abstract

Amid the growing debates over the globalization of schooling, the United States seems both to embrace and to defy the idea that there can be one model for education. Despite the absence of a national curriculum and despite significant control of education located in school districts, researchers and policymakers in the United States typically lament the limited number of distinct and successful approaches to education. Some have suggested that the striking lack of variation across schools reflects a de facto “one best system” that governs school operations and instruction (Tyack 1974). At the same time, states and districts have pursued several significant and arguably systematic efforts to support the development of alternative educational approaches that reflect the needs and interests of local communities. For example, since the 1970s, the creation of magnet schools has been a popular means of instituting distinctive instructional goals and pedagogies to meet the needs of particular students, employers, and others (Blank, Levine, and Steel 1996). In recent years, the advent of charter schools and small schools reflects a renewed enthusiasm for developing schools that are free from many of the constraints of state and district bureaucracies and more responsive to the concerns of local community members (Bulkley and Fisler 2002; Clinchy 2000; Nathan 1996).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Blank, R. K., R. E. Levine, and L. Steel. 1996. After 15 years: Magnet schools in urban education. In Who chooses? Who loses? edited by B. Fuller and R. R Elmore with G. Orfield. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulkley, K., and J. Fisler. 2002. A decade of charter schools: From theory to practice (CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-35). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinchy, E. 2000. Creating new schools: How small schools are changing American education. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., and D. L. Ball. 1999. Instruction, capacity, and improvement: CPRE research report series. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Program. 1997. http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/compreform/2pager.html

  • Elmore, R. E, C. Abelmann, and S. H. Fuhrman. 1996. The new accountability in state education policy. In Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education, edited by H. Ladd. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrman, S. H. 1999. The new accountability (CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-27). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fuhrman, S. H., and R. E Elmore. 1990. Understanding local control in the wake of state education reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 12 (1): 82–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goertz, M. E., R. E. Floden, and J. O’Day. 1996. The bumpy road to education reform (CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-20). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, T. 2002. When improvement programs collide. Phi Delta Kappan 83 (8): 626–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, F. M. 1999. Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massell, D. 1998. State strategies for building local capacity: Addressing the needs of standards-based reform (CPRE Policy Briefs No. RB-25). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massell, D. 2000. The district role in building capacity: Four strategies. (CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-32). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, J. P. 1996. Redesigning School. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, J. 1996. Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Day, J., M. E. Goertz, and R. E. Floden, 1995. Building capacity for education reform (CPRE Policy Brief No. RB-20). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. S., and J. A. O’Day. 1991. Systemic school reform. In The politics of curriculum and testing, edited by S. Fuhrman and B. Malen. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, J. P. 1996. School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy 10(1):63–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyack, D. 1974. The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Kathryn M. Anderson-Levitt

Copyright information

© 2003 Kathryn M. Anderson-Levitt

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hatch, T., Honig, M. (2003). Getting Beyond the “One Best System”?. In: Anderson-Levitt, K.M. (eds) Local Meanings, Global Schooling. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403980359_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics