THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, October 26, 1996 TAG: 9610260230
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY MATTHEW BOWERS, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: 68 lines
School principals and teachers calling the shots in their own buildings might have its benefits, but improved student achievement isn't one of them.
That is according to a University of Virginia study of the growing trend of self-managed schools - known as ``site-based'' or ``school-based'' management - presented Friday to a national meeting of education administrators in Louisville. A third of American schools now practice the concept, which gives principals, teachers, other school workers and parents more authority in making school decisions.
``School-based management has been widely adopted because administrators believe a decision-making process that encourages teacher participation will enable schools to respond more effectively to students' needs, resulting in improved achievement,'' said James P. Esposito, an associate professor of education who led the research project.
``The data clearly shows that student achievement, as measured by standardized test scores, does not improve in schools that have adopted the system.''
In fact, of 35 Virginia schools surveyed, 18 saw drops in their average fourth-grade test scores and 13 saw rises. None of the changes were statistically significant, evidence that the management style had no effect either way.
That does not mean that site-based management is bad, Esposito said.. Although definitions vary, it is generally where school personnel make many of the decisions concerning how their schools are run, from class schedules to dismissal plans to parking arrangements. Norfolk and Virginia Beach, for example, use it extensively.
Benefits noted include higher teacher morale, the ability to respond more quickly and effectively to school problems, even the ``concept of democracy'' in education. It just should not be pushed as a way to create more successful students, Esposito said.
``Most of what we do in the name of innovation very rarely gets assessed in terms of the impacts it has on outputs,'' he said. `` `Outputs' meaning `student achievement.'
``We should be reforming what we do in schools in the name of `outputs.' ''
His study - conducted with then-student Lisa Bell as part of her doctoral dissertation - was one of the first to examine site-based management's impact on student achievement.
The pair began in 1995 surveying a sample of Virginia schools identified as site-based management users for four years or longer, and examined their test scores from 1991 to 1994. They factored out other variables such as school size, per-pupil spending and how rich or poor the children were.
``Structural arrangements have little to do with - or can't force - changes in teacher behavior,'' Esposito said.
``Too many of these innovations, reform efforts - like block scheduling, cooperative learning, site-based management - all can facilitate improvement in classroom learning, but they don't guarantee it.
``What we found, I don't believe, is surprising at all. What we hope is that people interested in reform initiate reforms that affect what teachers do in their classrooms.''
That is not necessarily what site-based management was intended for all involved, said Linda Tanner, principal of Alanton Elementary School in Virginia Beach. A faculty council there of teachers and other school workers reaches a consensus on school concerns, but not personnel matters.
A change in student achievement is ``not something I've looked at or studied,'' Tanner said. Although test scores there have risen in recent years, she cannot attribute that to how the school is run.
``It's good, like I said, because of teacher morale . . . making them more a part of the process.''
KEYWORDS: EDUCATION SITE-BASED SCHOOLS by CNB