Abstract
This chapter compares a number of systemic change approaches to K-12 school innovation. The approaches reviewed in this chapter range from idealized design to leveraged emergent design, school-wide to district-wide transformation, and key-leader directed to broad-stakeholder-directed transformation. Definitions of each approach are reviewed, along with key practices of each and comparisons among them. The chapter does not recommend a particular approach for all or even most cases, but rather is intended to stimulate discussion and understanding of their advantages and disadvantages within the culture and context of any particular school community.
Reprinted with permission. The F.M. Duffy Reports 11(3), 1–18.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ackoff, R. L. (1979). Resurrecting the future of operational research’, Journal of the Operational Research Society 30, 189–199.
Arriaza, G. (2004). Making changes that stay made: School reform and community involvement. The High School Journal, 87(4), 10–24.
Banathy, B. H. (1991). Educational systems design: A journey to create the future. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Banathy, B. H. (1992). A systems view of education: Concepts and principles for effective practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Banathy, B. H. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. New York: Plenum Press.
Berends, M., Bodilly, S. J., & Kirby, S. N. (2002). Looking back over a decade of whole-school reform: The experience of New American Schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(2), 168–175.
Borko, H., Wolf, S. A., Simone, G., & Uchiyama, K. P. (2003). Schools in transition: Reform efforts and school capacity in Washington State. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 171–201.
Borman, G., Hewes, G., Overman, L., & Brown, S. (2002). Comprehensive school reform and student achievement: A meta-analysis (No. 59). Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk.
Brandon, P. R. (1999). Involving program stakeholders in reviews of evaluators’ recommendations for program revisions. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22, 363–372.
Carr, A. A. (1996). Leadership and community participation: Four case studies. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 12(2), 152–168.
Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2006), User Design. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Carroll, J. M. (2000). Five reasons for scenario-based design. Interacting with Computers, 13, 43–60.
Comprehensive School Reform Program: About Us. Retrieved April 26, 2006, from http://www.ed.gov/programs/compreform/2pager.html
Corcoran, T., & Lawrence, N. (2003). Changing district culture and capacity: The impact of the Merck Institute for Science Education partnership. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
Cox, T. R. (1999). A qualitative study of a capacity building professional development experience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of West Virginia, Morgantown, WV.
Datnow, A., & Stringfield, S. (2000). Working together for reliable school reform. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(1&2), 183–204.
Duffy, F., Rogerson, L.G., & Blick, C. (2000). Redesigning America's schools: A systems approach to improvement. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc.
Epstein, J. L. (1997). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Fullan, M. (2000). The three stories of education reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(8), 581–584.
Greene, J.C., (1988). Stakeholder participation and utilization in program evaluation. Evaluation Review, 12(2), 91–116.
Hafner, A. L. (1992). Developing model student information systems: Promising practices. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED358516). San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for the Educational Research and Development.
Hatch, T. (2000). What does it take to break the mold? Rhetoric and reality in New American Schools. Teachers College Record, 102(3), pp. 561–589.
Henry, G. T., Dickey, K. C., & Areson, J. C., (1991). Stakeholder participation in educational performance monitoring systems. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13(2), 177–188.
Jenlink, P. M. (1995). Systemic change: Touchstones for the future school. Palatine, IL: Skylight.
Jenlink, P. M., Reigeluth, C. M., Carr, A. A., & Nelson, L. M. (1996). An expedition for change: Facilitating the systemic change process in school districts. TechTrends, 41(1), 21–30.
Jenlink, P. M., Reigeluth, C. M., Carr, A. A., & Nelson, L. M. (1998). Guidelines for facilitating systemic change in school districts. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 15(3), 217–233.
Joseph, R. (2003). Formative research on a cesign theory to facilitate systemic change in public school districts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
Latchem, C., & Hanna, D. E. (2002). Leadership for open and flexible learning. Open Learning, 17(3), 203–215.
McChesney, J. (1998). Whole-school reform (No. 124). Eugene, OR: ERIC Digest.
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2003). The design way: Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Omerod, R. (1995). Putting soft OR methods to work: Information systems strategy development at Sainsbury's. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46(3), 277–293.
Pourdehnad, J., & Hebb, A. (2002). Redesigning the Academy of Vocal Arts (AVA). Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 19, 331–338.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1993). Principles of educational systems design. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(2), 117–131.
Reigeluth, C. M. (2006). The Guidance system for transforming education. Tech Trends, 50(2), 42.
Saegert, S. (1996). Growing the seeds of strength in high risk urban neighborhoods. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Schlechty, P. C. (1990). Schools for the 21st century: Leadership imperatives for educational reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Squire, K. D. (1999). Opportunity initiated systems design. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 12(6), 633–648.
Squire, K., & Reigeluth, C. (2000). The many faces of systemic change. Educational Horizons, 78(3), 143–152.
Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J., (1995). Effective features of collaborative school-linked services for children in elementary school: What do we know from research and practice? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED399309). Nairobi, Kenya/Philadelphia, PA: Coordinating center for Regional Information Training.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Reigeluth, C.M., Carr-Chellman, A., Beabout, B., Watson, W. (2009). Creating Shared Visions of the Future for K-12 Education: A Systemic Transformation Process for a Learner-Centered Paradigm. In: Moller, L., Huett, J., Harvey, D. (eds) Learning and Instructional Technologies for the 21st Century. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09667-4_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09667-4_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-09666-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-09667-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)