Detracking reform in an urban California high school: Improving the schooling experiences of African American students

Robert Cooper

Using qualitative and quantitative methods, this article examines one large, racially mixed, urban California school community's response to the growing tension between excellence and equity in public education; and concurrently describes how African American students in this setting experienced school reform in general and detracking reform in particular. At the school in question, fundamental changes in the structure, curriculum, and instructional practices were effected for the ninth-grade class by eliminating tracking and heterogeneously grouping in English and history. The data obtained suggest that detracking reform has the potential to create intellectually rich and equitable learning opportunities for all students while easing some of the tension associated with this process.

INTRODUCTION

Despite its importance, little is known about the impact of detracking reform on the learning opportunities, academic achievement, and academic engagement of students in American schools, particularly its impact on students of color. Can detracking reform contribute to creating intellectually rich and equitable learning opportunities for African American students, while easing some of the tension between excellence and equity in public education? With a growing belief among educators and policymakers that increased heterogeneity may be a viable alternative to tracking, further investigation is warranted.

This article attempts to answer that question by centering its analysis on the case of Liberty High School in Jefferson Town, California.1Liberty High is one of 10 racially mixed secondary schools that participated in a national, three-year longitudinal qualitative case study of detracking reform (Oakes & Wells, 1991). The restructuring of instructional grouping practices at Liberty represented one of the most comprehensive detracking efforts of all the senior high schools participating in that study. The support for such reform, which emanated from several key administrators and teachers at Liberty High, served as a catalyst for the launching of a pilot detracking program at the school. This event also coincided with the start of the Oakes and Wells study. As a result, the progress of the reform effort at Liberty High was documented from its inception.

Like those of an increasing number of communities in the state of California and elsewhere throughout the contemporary United States, Liberty High School's student population runs the gamut of racial and cultural diversity, with no one racial or ethnic group claiming a majority. Its student body also represents a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds. Within an urban multicultural setting such as that surrounding Liberty High, issues of race, class, and culture intersect with issues of excellence and equity to create conflict and compromise in school communities. Liberty illuminates some of the unique challenges these communities encounter.

In fall 1990, a group of Jefferson Town's educators, parents, and community members came to the realization that the tracking system at Liberty High served to institutionalize a mutually exclusive relationship between excellence and equity within their community. In their view, the grouping practices employed in the school served not only as a mechanism by which the academic achievement gap between students of color and their White counterparts was reinforced and widened, but also one by which divisive racial and socioeconomic stereotypes were perpetuated. Upon reaching this consensus, a bold experiment was initiated at Liberty High. Its goals: to eliminate tracking, to expose all students to the same rigorous academic curriculum in English and history, and to foster improved interracial/inter-ethnic understanding.

To better understand the complexity and magnitude of the influence of a multicultural and multiracial context on Liberty High School's restructuring effort, it is important to situate this reform within a broader social context (Wells, Hirshberg, & Lipton, 1994). Such an awareness reveals that the history, politics, economics, and culture of the community in which Liberty High is embedded set the parameters for the type and degree of fundamental change that occurred. This context not only sets the stage for the findings and conclusions of the present study, it also gives insights into the goals, motivations, and strategies of the individuals who became involved in pushing for change at Liberty High.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

To better understand the specific tension between equity and excellence at Liberty High, the following analysis draws heavily upon the work of Willie (1987), who suggests that excellence is "a quality, a deed, a virtue and as such is the property of the individual" (p. 205). Willie defines equity as a method or technique of distributing limited resources, opportunities, and services among many individuals in a way that is fair. Asserting that equity is the property of the group, not of the individual, he further argues that schools have the privilege and obligation to educate and certify their students to be competent, capable, and productive members of the citizenry. However, after meeting the basic requirements of this institution, Willie contends that it is the individual student who must decide to enhance his or her own development to a level of educational excellence. Moreover, any student who aspires toward this goal, thereby demonstrating the individual aspect of excellence, must be prepared to make the necessary sacrifices. Thus, Willie subsequently argues that good schools and quality education are a function of high standards and diversity-not one or the other, but both. As such, if one identifies high standards as an aspect of excellence and diversity as an aspect of equity, then excellence and equity must be seen as complementing each other. Accordingly, it is this combination of excellence and equity that results in all students being provided with the best possible educational experience.

Despite the extensive desegregation efforts of the past 40 years, the American public educational system remains separate and unequal. Mirroring the values of a society characterized by racial stratification, public education reproduces the structural and social inequalities found in the society at large (Apple, 1979; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Bowles & Gintis, 1976). Perhaps the most common educational practice that contributes to the institutionalization of unequal access and opportunity for African American students in public education is ability grouping, or tracking. This practice has a variety of meanings in educational settings, yet it consistently implies some means of grouping students for instruction that is as homogeneous as possible in ability or achievement. As a result, students of color and low-income students are often disproportionately grouped into lower track, nonacademic classes and are denied exposure to an intellectually stimulating curriculum (Braddock, 1989; Oakes, 1985; Oakes, Gamoran, & Page, 1991; Oakes & Lipton, 1992). These inequities are further exacerbated because lower-track students frequently receive instruction from teachers who lack experience (Wheelock, 1994; Oakes & Wells, 1991), motivation (Murphy, 1993), resources (Darling-Hammond, 1993),2 and enthusiasm (Oakes & Wells, 1991). In the final analysis, however, it is the interaction among students, teachers, and curricula that defines the boundaries of educational access, equality, and success.

The educational practice of tracking and ability grouping originated around the turn of the 20th century as a way to prepare students for their "appropriate" place in the workforce. Students with high intellectual ability and skills were given access to rigorous academic training. Conversely, students who lacked academic promise were trained for vocational positions. Tracking policies and practices were supported by the philosophy that high achievement was more the product of innate ability and intellect, and less the product of an individual's work ethic or determination. As a result, most schools in the United States were structured around the belief that academic excellence can only be achieved by a few gifted and talented students.

Although this philosophy has dominated educational practice for the better part of the present century, a growing number of educators and policymakers have acknowledged its negative effects and the need for reform (Cooper, 1997; Oakes, 1985; Wheelock, 1994). Equity is one of the main concerns for these reformers. Educators concerned with equity issues argue that every child should be given the opportunity to be successful. If only a few students can achieve academic excellence, they contend, then the majority of students must be doomed to fail. Equity concerns have prompted many school communities to seek alternatives to their existing tracking practices. Like that of Liberty High, many school communities are experimenting with reducing and eliminating tracking systems, a process called "detracking" or "heterogeneous grouping."

PURPOSE AND NATURE OF THE STUDY

The qualitative dimension of the present study focuses on the influence of a multiracial and multicultural context on a school's restructuring effort. To get to the root of the conflict over tracking at Liberty High School, over one hundred interviews were conducted with educators, administrators, parents, and students who were involved in or affected by detracking reform at Liberty High (Oakes & Wells, 1991). The quantitative dimension focuses on the results of a survey of 319 ninth-grade Liberty High students conducted by the author during the spring of 1995. Analysis of these survey data examines issues that were explored qualitatively in the larger study and provides empirical results that might otherwise have gone undetected (Bryk & Raudenbush, 1992). Specifically, this article looks at (a) the degree to which African American students perceive that the principles of detracking reform are being implemented; and (b) how student academic achievement, academic engagement, and enjoyment of the English/ history core courses may be affected by students' perceptions of detracking efforts.

THE SETTING: LIBERTY HIGH SCHOOL-A CASE STUDY OF URBAN SCHOOL RESTRUCTURING

We went with a very specific desegregation plan, not under any court order, simply because that was the feeling in Jefferson Town. (a Liberty High school official)

In September 1968, Jefferson Town, California, became one of the first major American cities to achieve total voluntary integration in its public schools. The hopes, dreams, and liberalism of the entire community were perhaps best captured in a statement by a White parent as she prepared to drop her daughter off at an integrated school for the first time. In her words: "I think it is going to be a wonderful experience for the children, I only wish I had the same opportunity when I was young" (Cooper, 1995, pg. 21).

Today, Liberty High School, the only high school serving the 102,000 people of Jefferson Town, embodies a high degree of diversity. Of its approximately 2,500 ninth- through 12th-grade students, 41% are White, 38% are African American, 10% are Hispanic, 10% are Asian, and 1% are members of other racial/ethnic groups. The school's sprawling 17-acre campus takes up three city blocks, and the magnificent architectural design of its main quad is a reminder of the rich history and long tradition the school has enjoyed. Recognized nationwide for its rigorous academic program, Liberty High continues to offer extensive advanced placement and honors programs, despite the ongoing statewide budget crises.

Over the years, the administrators, teachers, students, and parents of Liberty High have taken great pride in their accomplishments. The school boasts of its students' having one of the highest mean Scholastic Aptitude Test scores in the Oakland/ San Francisco-East Bay area. In the past several years, Liberty has graduated an average of 36 National Merit Scholarship-commended students and 19 National Merit semifinalists per year; 55% of its graduates go on to four-year colleges or universities, and over 30% pursue higher education at two-year institutions. The school also benefits from its close proximity to several outstanding colleges and universities, whereby students are routinely exposed to the resources, benefits, and opportunities afforded by postsecondary education.

Despite the school's accolades, a walk on its campus makes it clear that Liberty is located in an urban setting that is plagued by many of the same problems confronting most of urban America: graffiti, drugs, violence, lack of resources, racial/ethnic tension, and conflict. Surprisingly, despite these problems, Liberty has not experienced the degree of "White flight" documented in so many other urban schools (Cooper, 1995). Apparently, Jefferson City's White parents' concerns about the deteriorating facilities and safety of the surrounding urban area have failed to outweigh either their appreciation for Liberty's curriculum or their respect for the school's reputation for preparing students to attend prestigious colleges.

The reasons for this are simple: School attendance, graduation, and college-send rates as well as the rates at which students receive D or F grades on their report cards indicate that Liberty High School provides an extraordinary public education for its White middleand upper-middle-class students. Although several White students confided in their interviews that they felt "threatened" by non-White students at Liberty, the majority expressed enormous satisfaction with their high school academic experience. They further maintained that their typically segregated classroom experiences at the school, combined with knowing which places to avoid on campus, made them feel safe.

Prior to the detracking initiative, the schooling experience was dramatically different for Liberty's African American and Latino students. Like their peers in many urban high schools, Liberty's African American and Latino students, who make up over 50% of the school's student body, suffered from high attrition rates. While African Americans and Latinos represented less than 10% of the students in the school's top track or advanced level classes, they comprised 60% to 70% of the students in its lower-track classes. Despite innovative efforts such as the creation of an African American Studies Department, an ethnic studies requirement, and a Computer Academy for "at risk" students, the majority of these students were simply not successful in the Liberty High environment. Using the criteria of attendance, graduation, college-send, and D/F rates, the data suggest that hundreds of African American and Latino students failed to be engaged in the educational process at Liberty.

These findings become especially alarming when one compares the D/F rates for students in the higher and lower tracks. The average D/F rate for students in the top track at Liberty during the 1992-93 academic year was 22%; for those in the middle track it was 38%; and for those in the lower track, 52%. When D/ F data for 1992-93 are broken down by ethnicity, the rate for African American students was a stunning 71%! In effect, 7 out of every 10 African American students enrolled that year at Liberty High went home with a bad report card! By contrast, the D/F rate for White students, which was 21% for the 1992-93 academic year, actually improved during 1993-94 to a low of 17%.

Which students were excelling at Liberty High, and which were falling by the academic wayside? Disparities such as those noted above make the answer to this question crystal clear. As one of the school's mathematics teachers stated in an interview with the researcher: "Who are the most successful? It's the Asian and the White kids.... The ones who are really losing out are the African American kids." These blunt conclusions were echoed by Liberty's principal, who noted that awareness of this dilemma was widespread in Jefferson Town:

We all recognize it. The staff and the community. We all recognize that we are not doing a good job with a large portion of our student body, which is generally African American, Latino, and some Asian.... We are not meeting their needs. We have a large enrollment of those populations as ninth graders, and by the twelfth grade this population of students is significantly different. It is not a dropout rate, it is a leave rate. I guess that is the best way to explain it [is that they] . . . go to other schools. Liberty is just not working for them.

One factor was identified as being at the root of this disparity: the school's tracking system. According to the principal:

I think that a lot of [Liberty's African American and Latino students] over the years have been placed in tracks that make them feel unsuccessful. And because we have a large group of students who are so successful, the disparity at times is very, very evident. I think that's what causes some of the kids to feel confused and a sense of failure.

Surprisingly, however, when asked to comment on their Liberty High experience, many African American students expressed great pride in their school. They frequently mentioned its outstanding and rigorous academic programs, the high quality of instruction at Liberty, the wide variety of its course offerings, and the freedom of choice offered by the school through self-scheduling. Nonetheless, they also noted that they and many of their African American peers often did not benefit from, or were prevented from taking full advantage of, the full range of academic resources available at Liberty. As one African American student stated:

Tracking got me. When I came to Liberty High in the ninth grade, the counselor didn't look at any of my report cards from my junior high, nothing. She automatically put me in the lower-track English. She just wrote it down without giving me a test or anything. I didn't know what it was. It was English 2a and it sounded like English to me. After a while, my English teacher told me that I should be in English la....

There was no real difference in the work between English la and 2a, but it is the teachers . . . the quality of the teachers and what they will tolerate in class. In the 2a classes there is nothing but talking.... The class is all Blacks . . . Blacks and Mexicans. The la class was White and Asians.

In my observations and interviews with Liberty's parents, students, teachers, and administrators about the effects of restructuring prior to the initiation of the pilot detracking program, almost without exception, the topic of race and race relations emerged. Of all the issues challenging the Liberty High School community during this period, intergroup relations was one of the most salient. It became evident from these discussions that race and race-related issues shaped and influenced the schooling experience of most students, both in and out of the classroom.

For example, despite the diversity of the student body, few students at Liberty crossed the color barrier when interacting with their peers outside the formal structure of the classroom. This lack of social interaction between the students was exacerbated by the fact that the school does not have a centralized student cafeteria. When the lunch bell sounded, those students who chose to stay on campus quickly scattered to their usual lunchtime locations. The African American students would "kick it" on the "slopes" in front of the school. The White students would hang out together on the stairs of the auditorium. Latino students would congregate at the rear of the school in an area called "Little Mexico." Only the Asian students seemed to have disseminated and assimilated into the school culture to the point that they formed no identifiable Asian "bloc" on campus.

As one of the few African American educators at Liberty characterized the school climate at the time: "The racial tension is so deeply embedded into the culture of Liberty High it is inescapable. African American students in this school are very angry, and White students . . . are very afraid, and that is about as blunt as I can be." She continued:

It's an amazing feeling, almost to the point where I begin to cry for some students....They feel so deeply hurt and oppressed that they want to fight and they do not care who they fight. They want to fight each other. They want to fight teachers. They are so angry. They are so angry. They are so tired of feeling like they're stupid. They are so tired of being bunched together.... The kids that are angry do not know why they are angry, and the kids that are being accused do not know why they are being accused. They are carrying the burden of the mess that we made historically in this country. They are just carrying the burden.

Generally, the school's African American students did not express any particular dislike for the idea of tracking. They did, however, express dissatisfaction with the process itself and its result. In their views, tracking was not necessarily bad; what was a problem for them was that African American and Latino students were always placed in the lower track classes. According to one of the few African American students in Liberty's college preparatory track, "The Blacks and the Latinos are tracked the worst. In fact, I have never seen two Latinos in a college prep class . . . no Mexicans or Latinos in them at all."

African American students also cited teachers' negative attitudes and uncaring behavior toward lower-track students, and their low expectations of those students as other factors contributing to their dissatisfaction with tracking. According to one such student, "It can be the same teacher and they will be so different in the way they teach their lowtracked classes and their high-tracked classes. In their low-tracked class, they don't even want to deal with the students." As another commented, ". . . tracking wouldn't be so bad if they had good teachers. It wouldn't be so bad if the teachers cared. They let the lower-track students run wild. It's like the teachers are scared."

One African American honors student, whose duties as an office assistant included being sent to classrooms to summon students to the office, expressed her concern that teachers in the lower-track classrooms were not only failing to provide their students with a quality education but were also unable to appropriately handle the students in their classes. In her view:

We pull people out of class with passes, and we went to these English classes, and I am not saying that this is for every classroom, but the kids were all over the place. They were hanging out of the window and talking to people. I couldn't believe it. I'm not allowed to do this in my [college prep] classes. I couldn't believe it. There was a student who went walking out of the class and the teachers did not do anything!

According to many of the African American students interviewed, the teachers in the lower-track classes viewed their students as hopeless, which in turn generated a feeling of hopelessness among those students. As one of these students commented:

I get the impression sometimes that teachers don't like kids. I think you have to like what you are doing to be good at it. It is like you can be a good teacher, but if you don't like the kids you are not going to be good at it.... You need to be really excited about teaching.

Success Amid the Storm: The Liberty High School African American Studies Department

The most frequently noted factor leading to the majority of Liberty's African American students expressing overall pleasure with their schooling experience is the presence of the school's African American Studies Department, one of the first ever established at the high school level, and one of few remaining such departments in the nation. As one graduating African American senior stated:

Liberty High is one of the best schools, regardless of the racism. Every high school has its problems. I go here because I am learning about myself. I am learning how to deal with certain things from my Black studies classes that I cannot learn anywhere else because no other high school is trying to make Black students stronger. They do not have built-in classes that try to teach you how to respect yourself, respect your females, be outspoken, to beat the shackles, and be your own person. I don't know any other school that says we need stronger Black people.... It is up to us. We are the future generation.

Other comments suggest that Liberty's African American Studies Department offers some of the most exciting learning opportunities available to the school's African American students, who are typically "locked out" of the rigorous educational process afforded their White and Asian peers. Without exception, students reported having positive, intellectually stimulating experiences in these classes. As another senior commented, the courses he took in the African American Studies Department had a profound effect on his academic outlook, sufficient to overcome the deleterious effects of his previous experiences in lower tracked classrooms:

It is interesting learning about yourself. I am proof of that. Look at my transcript. I didn't have African American Studies classes until the 11th grade. In the 9th grade, I had a 1.8 GPA [grade point average] overall. Tenth grade, I had a 1.9 GPA. Eleventh grade, I had a 3.1 GPA. This year, I have a 3.3 GPA, and I am taking the college prep, "White" classes....I never got anything over a "C" in history until the 11th grade; then in the 11th grade, when I had my African American Studies classes, [the classes] motivated me in my other classes, too. So I pulled an "A" in African American history and an "A" in economics.

Most of the African American students interviewed attributed their enjoyment and success in these classes to the relevant and inspiring curriculum. Others noted the extensive augmentation of the curriculum by the department's faculty members, all of whom are African American and many of whom are recent college graduates, that made the curriculum come alive for the students. These instructors were said to have effectively integrated resources, ideas, and activities from one of the neighboring universities to forge a strong partnership between their high school department and African American students and students at this university, who frequently serve as guest speakers. Course offerings range from African American history to more contemporary topics such as Black male/ female relations. Regardless of the course content, the classes focus on the constructive accomplishments and achievements of people of African ancestry and serve to debunk cultural stereotypes and myths regarding them.

Although curriculum and pedagogical approach are important, perhaps the simplest explanation for the positive effect of Liberty High School's African American Studies Department on Black student achievement is that, in these courses, these students felt respected and valued, whereas outside of them, in the rigid environment of the school's tracking system, their ability, potential, and promise was generally devalued. According to the department's director, one consistent theme connects all the courses his department offers: student empowerment. For many of the African American students interviewed, he noted, the academic and social atmosphere created in their African American Studies classroom was a rare experience. Without exception, the students indicated that their experiences in the African American Studies classes were refreshing and stimulating. Most of the instructors, they said, created a "family"-type atmosphere in their classrooms; students were encouraged to engage in interactive dialogue rather than to passively listen to a teacher disseminate disconnected pieces of information. Moreover, they indicated that cooperation and collaboration were valued over competition in these classes, and they were rewarded for taking intellectual risks. One student compared her experience in her African American Studies courses with those experienced in a calculus class:

I had calculus and I had two other Black students in the class and I was just excited. Before I just had one and that person dropped out so it was just me and it was like . . . it is just harder because you will be working in class on a problem and other people are friends and they know and respect each other and they are working it out. They have study groups, and, for me, I am not a part of any of that because I don't know any of these people. I just feel kind of left out.... I think it is wrong when somebody comes and tells me, "You don't belong in this class." It is an intimidation factor. They want you to leave this class. You know you can almost feel it in some classes from your teachers.

The two basic premises of Liberty High School's coring program are that (a) small supportive learning environments enhance students' learning opportunities, and Co) grouping students heterogeneously across race and ability improves intergroup relations. If these premises, of a program begun just four years ago, prove to be correct, then given stronger implementation this program can expect to have a powerful impact on the academic and social climate of the school in the future. Thus, while the core program shows great promise from a student perspective, in order for this reform effort to be truly effective for African American students, reform-minded educators at Liberty may have to join forces with those educators in the school's African American Studies Department. The collaboration between these two entities should result in effective strategies to ensure African American student success at Liberty High.

The chairman of the African American Studies also indicated that one of the duties of the teachers in his department was to expose students of color to the "hidden curriculum" of the school-that is, to reveal to them the unspoken norms, expectations, and behaviors transmitted to students through structures, policies, and processes that are used to distribute learning opportunities in schools and society (Irvine, 1991). According to the chairman, a lack of knowledge regarding this curriculum had historically prohibited Liberty's African American students from being as academically successful as they should have been. Indeed, several students indicated in their interviews that gaining an understanding of the interconnectedness of school policies and practices with the distribution of learning opportunities served as a source of motivation and encouragement for them to surmount academic challenges. This exposure to the hidden curriculum, offered by the one department whose express mandate was to stimulate the educational success of Liberty's underachieving African American students, helped these students make sense of their schooling experience.

THE PILOT DETRACKING PROGRAM

As the last students of the "Me Generation" of the 1980s exited the halls of Liberty High to clear the way for the 1990s "Generation X," members of the school community paused to take note of its graduates. Although the school could boast of many accomplishments-high graduation and college-sending rates as well as high SAT scores-it was clear that Liberty was failing to provide an educational environment in which all students could succeed. The extent of this failure could be measured by the low attendance rates and high failure and attrition rates of its African American and Latino students-rates that were as much as twice those of their White counterparts. Coming to grips with this reality, a group of educators, parents, and concerned community members met in the fall of 1990 to brainstorm about ways to sustain the academic excellence that Liberty was known to provide for its middle-class and wealthy White and Asian students, while simultaneously providing greater access to quality education for all of its students, regardless of race or ethnicity.

Out of these meetings, a restructuring committee was created to develop a plan outlining a vision for change at Liberty and to seek state funding for its efforts. The restructuring plan called for Liberty to evolve into an institution where educators and community members would value multiple ways of learning, and where options would be provided for students with all types of learning styles, interests, and abilities. It also focused on issues of race, class, and culture that had long divided the Liberty school community. Although the committee was unsuccessful in its bid to receive state funding for its restructuring efforts, there was general consensus to move forward with its plan as outlined.

The plan called for fundamental alterations to Liberty's freshman program. First, students in the school's ninth-grade English and history classes would be clustered together into small, heterogeneous groups in a process called "coring." Each core group would be comprised of 20 ninth-graders assigned to the same English and history classes. In the developers' view, this move toward heterogeneity would assure that all of Liberty's entering students would be exposed to the same curriculum in these courses. The teachers of these core classes would be encouraged to create themes for their lessons, and, where possible, to cross-connect themes between the two classes.

By design, such an arrangement was seen as encouraging teachers and students to develop knowledge collaboratively. It was also seen as challenging teachers to move beyond the educational construct that views teachers as disciplinarians and conveyers of knowledge and students simply as receivers of knowledge. Intellectual risk taking was to be the norm rather than the exception in this new "core" program. Moreover, teachers would be expected to build a classroom culture that respected and expected the participation and involvement of all students.

The strategy for achieving the objectives of this bold restructuring plan was designed by the principal and his administrative staff, working in concert with the chairs of the school's English and history departments. Together, this group devised a straightforward plan they believed would meet with the approval of the community. According to one of the key strategists:

We had a long series of discussions about the pros and cons of coring. We discussed what problems we [were] dealing with at Liberty High School and the solutions we needed to resolve them.... And this [the idea of core classes] came out of a long series of discussions.... I mean a simple little thing like English/ History working together around 10 themes or something-not changing the curriculum-sharing the students, but not necessarily sharing them at the same time. There's a lot of flexibility in that. Small classes of 20 was one of the criteria for it.... It became a whole package that if one piece wasn't there, the rest of it didn't work ... so people got advantages.... So it was crafted, it was a carefully crafted package.... We said from the very beginning, if one piece of it goes, we're not going to do it.

Aware that the social and political constraints against detracking were very powerful, the principal and his staff established a small-scale, pilot core program to gradually introduce the idea and gather the necessary experience and support needed to expand it. As the school's principal maintained in an interview with the researcher, a successful pilot program would preempt criticism of the program. Perhaps more importantly, it would provide school staff with the opportunity to work out the logistical details before scaling up the program.

Thus, in the fall of 1992, a carefully selected group of English and history teachers and students was chosen to participate in the pilot detracking program. Four sections of the English/history core were created. The teachers asked to participate in this experiment were respected veteran teachers who believed that coring was a viable alternative to the tracking system. Although the classes were clustered, these teachers were free to determine the degree of cross-class connection.

Each core class of 20 students was to represent a heterogeneous balance in terms of sex, ethnicity, and previous academic achievement in ratios that reflected Liberty's ninthgrade population.3 Consequently, each class consisted of 9 high achievers, 6 mid-level achievers, and 5 low achievers, each of whom were manually assigned to ensure that the desired diversity requirements were met. Each ninth-grader who would have previously been placed in a lower-tracked English class lost one elective period, but they were assigned an additional English class in its place. This second English class was called a "back-up class," and it was designed to support the lessons of the core English class. In advance of a lesson being introduced in a core class, the back-up teacher would go over the forthcoming curriculum materials with her students, thereby providing lower-ability pupils with a more thorough orientation to upcoming lessons and more time to work on assignments.

Despite community wariness about detracking, the pilot program was well-received by students, teachers, and parents alike. Given this positive feedback, and in the absence of any organized resistance to the program, Liberty's administrators decided to proceed with the coring initiative for the entire ninth-grade class during the 1992-93 school year. However, this move was agreed upon only after the chairs of the English and history departments secured a commitment of both financial and human resources from the school and the district. Further, the principal had to assure the department chairs that four major structural modifications of the traditional freshman program would remain in place during the scaling-up process. These modifications included:

(1) the reduction of class sizes to 20 students;

(2) the maintenance of a heterogeneous balance based on race, sex, and ability, created by manually assigning students to classes;

(3) the provision of tutorial assistance to low-achieving students; and

(4) the encouragement of a greater partnership between English and history teachers through collaborative projects.

In addition to these structural changes, the chairs demanded supplementary professional development to help them prepare to manage this reform effort.

The scaled-up program then had to be "sold" to Liberty's parents. One of the main concerns about detracking reform expressed by members of the school community was that it would result in "dumbing down" of the curriculum and consequently threaten the school's strong academic reputation. In response, the principal and his staff organized meetings with prospective ninth-graders' parents to explain the details of the program and to give parents adequate opportunity to voice their concerns on aspects ranging from curriculum content to discipline issues. Because both of the departmental chairs, who traditionally taught advanced-level classes, presented strong arguments in favor of the idea of coring as an opportunity from which all students could benefit, most of the school's parents began to accept the idea. Although some parents were still resistant to the idea, there was enough support for the program to enable the teachers and administrators to move forward without much opposition. In many ways, however, the success of the program rested on the reputations of these two educators.

Thus, in the fall of 1993, thirty-three sections of the ninth-grade English/history core program were initiated at Liberty High. The detracking program is still in existence.

Forces Resistant to Change

Although the coring initiative has been generally well-received since its inception, not all members of the Liberty school community deem it successful. Two groups have emerged as major resisters of the coring program at Liberty High: veteran teachers and parents of high-tracked students.

Many of the resistant veteran teachers noted that teaching the core classes required a great deal of additional preparation and forced them to teach new material in new ways. Some claimed that the school's administrators failed to provide them with the support, guidance, and training they needed to play meaningful roles in the program. Others voiced concerns about standardization and accountability. They noted, for example, that the degree to which implementation of the program took place, to which curricula were altered to include a more multicultural focus, or to which thematic lessons were shared across classes was left up to the individual teacher pairs. Even though a schoolwide philosophy guided the development of the core and both the English and history departments agreed to establish student-centered classrooms that utilized small group, cooperative learning techniques, no procedures were put into place to help translate these principles into classroom practice. They stated that they felt limited and stifled by having to coordinate lesson plans with each other; that coring limited their flexibility and creativity. The lack of guidance in the implementation of this reform led them to become frustrated. As a result, rather than struggling to make the reform work, many of these teachers returned to a "business as usual" approach to teaching.

For the resistant veteran teachers, detracking reform challenged conventional notions of ability, assessment, and intelligence. A comment offered by one teacher with 34 years of experience at Liberty sums up their sentiments. As this educator noted, "Detracking threatens our record of academic excellence. I've heard the arguments, but I don't believe the high-achieving kids benefit from detracking. There is simply no way you can make it stimulating for them." Other teachers resistant to the detracking program reported that the presence of too many low-achieving, unmotivated students in a class made it extremely difficult for them to maintain the levels of rigor and high expectations they wanted. Citing the need for low student-teacher ratios as one of the most crucial elements to the success of the program, they frequently asked that some type of continuous monitoring system be developed to ensure that no class had more than the representative number of lowachieving students. Additionally, many veteran teachers saw this reform initiative as pushing what McGivney and Moynihan (1972) call a school community's "zone of tolerance." In their view, this zone is the "area of maneuverability granted or yielded to leadership of the school by the local community" (p. 37). Within the context of detracking reform, Wells et al. (1994) suggest that this zone of tolerance is related to such community characteristics as racial/ethnic and social-class differences, apathy, degree of school and district bureaucracy, and the general fit between the predominant community expectations and the behavior of school personnel. For many veteran teachers, detracking reform presented a challenge to the status quo.

Difficulties in getting veteran teachers to buy into detracking reform at Liberty High can be traced back to the principal. Although the principal was a visionary who surrounded himself with fellow colleagues who shared his vision, he neglected to create a shared meaning of this reform with the veteran teachers. In some instances, he gave these teachers the option to not participate in the program, concentrating instead on assembling a critical mass of less-experienced teachers who shared that vision. A negative side effect of this strategy was that no real effort was made to convince the resisters of the merits of the reform effort.

The second group that emerged as significant opponents to this particular detracking reform initiative were the parents of Liberty's high-tracked, and primarily White, students. These parents, who had long been highly involved in school governance and other affairs, were represented by a group called Mothers of Excellence. This group views itself as a watchdog for ensuring quality education at the school generally and as advocates for the protection of the interests of gifted students specifically. When its members were asked to embrace educational reform that leveled the playing field for all students, the cost, even in the name of social equality, seemed too high to them. As one member of tfe organization commented:

Liberty is a school that people care deeply about. Liberty High is a part of Jefferson Town's culture. It represents for us more than, I think, most high schools do for their community. It reflects Jefferson Town at both our best and our worst, and a lot of our dreams are lodged in this school. I think it hurts people deeply that it doesn't work for minority kids. It really does. That's why experimentation is carefully thought out and carefully evaluated. It has a real chance in the community, but people have to trust that it will be fair, and that nobody will be sacrificed.

As influential stockholders in the school community, the Mothers of Excellence encouraged and welcomed innovation and reform-as long as it did not sacrifice students in the upper tracks, and as long as it left the school's Advanced Placement and honors programs alone. One parent's perspectives on the coring initiative and its implications capture the sentiments of many of Liberty's White parents:

I think the one thing that really works at Liberty High is the upper track. It does. To me, I guess my goal would be for us to find a way to make the rest of Liberty High to work as well as the upper track, but it's crucial that we not destroy the upper track to do that, and that can happen....I feel my daughter will get an excellent education if the program continues the way it is . . . and if the levels continues so that they are not all smoothed together.

As Miles and Louis (1990) have argued, the hard work of school reform is negotiating the difficult path of getting new practices and ideas into the real life of the classroom. Like many reform efforts, the Liberty core program was well-planned, but it suffered from lack of the necessary leadership to manage and lead the process of change. Like many of his predecessors, the principal during this period of school reform-the ninth person to hold that office in 15 years-was unable to move Liberty beyond the history and tradition in which it was so deeply entrenched. The excessive principal turnover prior to his tenure had permitted several strong factions to develop within the school, all of which were struggling to impose their ideas and agenda on the larger school community. Balancing the needs of a student body with a bipolar academic distribution that breaks down along racial lines, proved to be too big a challenge. Liberty was indeed a tough place to be principal. The liberal ideals and principles that serve as the cornerstone of this progressive community were challenged by the reform idea of detracking. After a short, three-year term, the political maneuvering of influential veteran teachers and parents of upper-tracked students forced the principal to resign in the spring of 1995.

STUDENT PERSPECTIVES ON SCHOOL RESTRUCTURING: A CRITICAL INVESTIGATION

The Student Sample

The first step in this analysis of student perspectives on detracking reform was to verify whether or not the Liberty core groups were balanced by race, gender, current mathematics placement, and previous schooling experience as dictated by those who conceived the detracking plan. This analysis revealed that, in accordance with the original design, students were indeed evenly distributed across the different core pairs. No statistical difference was found in their demographic profiles.

The sample represented 19 different core pairs. The number of respondents in the sample from each core pair varied from 4 to 34 ninth-graders. The total sample size was 319 students, representing approximately 75% of the students enrolled in the core program during spring 1995. The sample was racially representative of the freshmen class, with 28% African American, 12% Asian, 9% Latino/Chicano, 39% White, and 12% students identifying themselves as "Other." Forty-seven percent of the respondents were female. Sixty-nine percent reported that they had come to Liberty from one of the two feeder schools, and 31% had attended eighth grade outside the Jefferson Town school district. Thirteen percent of the students in this latter group came from public institutions, while 18% came from private schools. Additionally, 29% of the respondents indicated that they were enrolled in geometry and 48% in Algebra I. Less than 13% of the sample indicated that they were taking a remedial mathematics class.

Instrument

Nieto (1995) notes that although students are the most affected by school policies and practices, they are often the least consulted. Referring to students as the "silent recipients of schooling" (p. 2), she argues that they should be given a voice in discussions that center on the transformation of schooling enterprise. She further maintains that student insights can be important sources of information for meaningful, transformative, and engaging educational experiences. In line with ideas such as those expressed by Nieto, a questionnaire was developed to assess student attitudes toward the detracking program. The survey was designed to capture students' attitudes regarding classroom culture, teacher practices, and their experience in the core classes. It consisted of 50 items utilizing a 7-point Likert-type scale from 1 ("least favorable") to 7 ("most favorable"). The questionnaires were distributed and collected by teachers in the English core classes.

Measures

Control measures for this analysis included gender; students' current mathematics placement, which served as a proxy for track placement outside of English and history; and the school they attended in eighth grade. Controlling for school attended in eighth grade was deemed important because Liberty High School has two feeder schools, one of which is completely heterogeneously grouped. Using these measures as controls helped to reduce the possibility of attributing potential differences between student responses to student characteristics such as prior academic achievement and social economic status. Although data on prior academic achievement and social economic status were not available for this analysis, current mathematics placement and the school attended in eighth grade served as the closest proxies for these factors.

Attitudinal measures were also employed to capture the degree to which Liberty High students felt that their schooling experience in the core program differed from "traditional" classroom experiences, which are often characterized by homogeneous and competitive individualized learning. Students were asked to rate the degree to which their core classes were: (a) comfortable, (b) concerned, (c) cooperative, (d) diverse, (e) friendly, (f) intellectual, and (g) noncompetitive. These measures yield a composite of the students' attitudes about both their English and history classes. The alpha reliability for these variables varied from .61 to .86 (FRIENDLY = .73, CONCERN = .62, INTELLECT = .71, DIVERSE = .86, COMFORT = .68, COOP = .61, NONCOMP = .72).

Three outcome measures were also explored in this analysis: (a) academic performance in core classes (GRADES), (b) academic engagement in core classes (ENGAGE), and (c) enjoyment of core classes (LIKECORE). The first outcome measure was a composite score combining self-reported grades in both the English and history core classes. Reliability is strong with an alpha coefficient of .88. The second outcome measure combined six items and had a modest alpha reliability of .67. The six items were: "I like going to history class," "I like going to English class," "I do my homework for my history class," "I do my homework for my English class," "I am bored in history class," and "I am bored in English class." The third student outcome measure was a composite variable that combined two items: "I feel core classes are a good idea," and "I enjoy being in the core." It had a very strong alpha coefficient of .94.

Findings

The data from the student surveys are reported in Table I. These data suggest that the core program, from a student perspective, shows promise:

62% of the students indicated that they enjoyed being in the core program;

61% reported that their core classes were comfortable;

55% reported that their classes were cooperative;

61% indicated that their core classes were friendly; and

over 68% of the students indicated that they were actively engaged in their core classes.

The data further suggest that the core program not only created a positive learning environment for students, but also created intellectually rich and equitable learning opportunities for them. Fifty-two percent of the students reported that the content covered in their core classes challenged their intellectual abilities; 36% responded that there was no noticeable difference in their experience. The academic integrity of the core program was a particularly important issue for many students, as one of the major sources of resistance to this detracking effort was the fear that students interacting cooperatively across racial lines and ability groups would result in a "dumbing down" of the curriculum and the quality of instruction at Liberty. By contrast, the majority of students surveyed indicated that their core teachers not only intellectually challenged them, but did so with a curriculum that was both culturally sensitive and reflective of issues that were important to them. Forty-five percent of the students also reported that their teachers provided this intellectually rich environment in the context of small, cooperative learning groups.

Because multicultural learning environments that incorporate cooperative learning historically have not been the norm in rigorous academic college preparatory courses, educators at Liberty High were aware that certain elements had to be in place before the majority of their students would deem the core program a success. Key among these was that students across various groups had to perceive the core as maintaining a high level of academic integrity and rigor. The idea behind the core was to make the type of access and learning opportunities traditionally available to high-tracked students accessible to all without diluting the curriculum and the quality of instruction. Favorably, the data obtained seem to suggest that one of the goals of the core was achieved-namely, that of creating small, supportive learning communities that use cooperative learning techniques and provide greater opportunities for students to work and interact collaboratively across racial lines and ability.

Additionally, 60% of the students responded that their core classes addressed issues of cultural and racial diversity. Given the volatile racial tension evident on the Liberty High campus this finding is particularly meaningful for the school community. For some students-particularly high-track middle- and upper-class White and Asian students and their parents-detracking emerged as a symbol of racial/ethnic and social-class mixing and thus became the target of much resistance. In the qualitative analysis, many hightrack students expressed discontent with the reform effort. They maintained that the impetus for creating the core program was to lower academic standards so that more African American and Latino Liberty students could be academically successful. However, according to the overall student survey data, the core program appeared not to lower academic standards; rather, it promoted greater academic success.

According to the sampled students' self-reported grades in their core classes, only 10% received a D or an F during the 1995 spring semester. This D/F rate is better than that for the two preceding academic years. Although these figures do not include grades in classes outside the core program, these rates suggest that few students took home bad report cards because of their performance in their history or English class. If one believes that student engagement increases academic performance, this low D /F rate is very consistent with the finding that, as noted above, over 68% of the students indicated that they were actively engaged in their core classes.

Discussion: Implications of Detracking Reform for African American Students Although the majority of African American ninth-graders, like their classmates, reported having positive experiences in the core program, they also reported being less engaged and receiving lower grades. Their engagement level was not statistically different from that of their peers, but the differences in their reported academic performance was statistically significant at the .01 level. The D/F rate for African American students was 21%, compared to 16% for Chicanos/Latinos, 13% for "Others," 4% for Whites, and 3% for Asians. Sixty percent of all F's given in the core program were given to African American students; conversely, over 70% of all A's given in the core program were given to White students. The mean grade point average (GPA) for all students in the core was 3.0; however, the mean GPA for African American students was 2.3.

Given that general predictors of academic performance (parental occupation, parental education, family income, and scores on aptitude tests; Epps, 1983) were not available for the sampled Liberty High School population, it is difficult to argue conclusively why this achievement gap persists between the school's African American students and those of other groups. However, several explanations emerge from the qualitative data, ranging from a lack of motivation and skills on the part of the students to blatant racist practices on the part of the school's educators. The most plausible explanation, given the historical and social context of the school, is that the educators at Liberty focused their efforts on the technical aspects of this reform (e.g., scheduling, curriculum content, and balance) and neglected to address the normative dimensions of implementing change.

Many of the normative beliefs and cultural values of United States society, precepts such as individualism and meritocracy, as well as the deficit view of African American and Latino students that created the need for this reform, were in operation within the core program. In the process of developing and operationalizing this particular detracking reform initiative, Liberty's educators were challenged to think about what and how they teach, not about who they teach. Unfortunately, educators are not immune to the prevailing cultural ethos that typically categorizes and stereotypes African American students, particularly males, by the "five D's": dumb, deprived, dangerous, deviant, and disturbed (Gibbs, 1988). Viewing African American students from this perspective results in their being identified, en masse, as discipline cases and low-achievers.

CONCLUSION

Miles and Louis (1990) point out that there are many strikes against real school change in urban high schools, and the risk of failure is greater than the probability of success. Although urban communities agree that educational reform is needed in schools, practitioners in these schools have not fully mastered how to lead and manage the process of change. Although there exist a preponderance of images of academic excellence and formulas for equity for our urban schools, clear examples of how schools negotiate the change process are sorely lacking. As the data from this examination of detracking reform at one urban high school in California suggest, creating fundamental change in structures, organization, and curriculum is a long and difficult process. The coring experiment at Liberty High does not provide a blueprint for "problem-free" school reform, but it does lend valuable insights on the process of change in a multicultural and multiracial setting. It also offers strategies for addressing some of the unique challenges urban institutions encounter in that process. The data obtained from this investigation further suggest that institutional culture-that is, the norms and ethos that drive policy and practice within an institution such as the school-may just as easily serve as a barrier to change as a facilitator of it. In the case of Liberty High, despite educators', administrators', and parents' enthusiastic voluntary participation in the school restructuring effort, the institutional culture was simply too great an obstacle for them to overcome.

Although the most important conceptual underpinning of this detracking effort was the development of new approaches to teaching and learning, the principal and his administrative staff devoted very little time and resources to helping teachers develop the techniques and strategies needed to utilize the new approaches. Classroom observations and interviews with teachers suggest that many core teachers had difficulty delivering instruction in nontraditional ways. Quantitative analyses reveal that the distribution of school expectations, opportunities, and grade distribution in many core classes looked very similar to those found in noncore classes. Moreover, although the institutional culture encouraged the development of alternative curricula, instructional and assessment strategies, and approaches to teaching and learning, it failed to encourage the necessary staff training needed to implement them.

Additionally, critical issues related to the racial / ethnic diversity of the Jefferson Town community made the possibility of long-term fundamental change difficult but not impossible. Despite the efforts of those supporting detracking reform at Liberty, views predicated on racial and/or ethnic biases were frequently used as a commonsense way of comprehending and explaining the school environment in this California setting (Cooper, 1996). Oftentimes unintentionally, actions, attitudes, and perceptions related to detracking efforts took on racially provocative meanings and bore damaging implications for interracial/ inter-ethnic relations. Educators, parents, and students alike were influenced by a cultural socialization process that attached meanings to assertions about members of various races and ethnic groups that are neither prejudice- nor value-free.

To counter these forces and barriers, the Liberty High school community required multifaceted strategies that acknowledged the multicultural, multiracial context of both the institution and the political and social environment of the community in which it was embedded. Its failure to recognize or utilize those strategies yielded the less-than-hopedfor results from the detracking reform initiative. The results envisioned by the restructuring reformers at Liberty High did not materialize; nor were the radical changes in curriculum, classroom instruction, and student outcomes-both in terms of student achievement and racial harmony-ever realized. Coring did not ameliorate the academic disparities among the different racial and ethnic groups on the school's campus, and African American students continued to receive disproportionately lower grades than their counterparts.

The data do suggest, however, that a large percentage of African American students at Liberty High were academically successful in the core program. Like the courses offered by the school's African American Studies Department, the coring initiative created classroom experiences for students that were both responsive to racial and ethnic diversity and intellectually rich, but the effects were not robust enough to break through the patterns of racial/ethnic differences in academic outcomes. Perhaps deeper examination of the successes achieved by the African American Studies Department, in conjunction with greater collaboration between the educators in that department and those of the core program, might be a first step in developing more effective strategies for this population of students. Nonetheless, detracking-albeit in this cautious pilot implementationseemed to benefit Liberty's students, and it certainly did not harm them. Thus, the reformminded educational stakeholders at Liberty High, while disappointed, were encouraged by the changes that actually seemed to enhance African American and Latino students' classroom experiences.

Perhaps one of the greatest lessons to be learned from the research described in this article is what it reveals about the important role of institutional culture in the implementation of school reform. Many tend to think of schools as neutral, nonpolitical places that are in business to educate students. Attempts at educational reform usually take these assumptions for granted and concentrate on developing other aspects such as better educational technologies. As a result, little attention is given to the institutional culture that actually shields traditional school practices from change. However, as Hargreaves, Davis, and Fullan (1991) make clear, attention to this culture is vital to the success or failure of any type of school reform. Although schools are under pressure to change, the political and social cultures of the communities in which they are embedded make it difficult for them to do so in any fundamental way. Therefore, any serious reform effort must change communities' conceptualizations of schools; only then will the expectations and actions of communities change, and subsequently restructuring of their schools succeed.

If educators and policymakers are to meet the challenge of providing excellent education to all students in the 21st century, relevant and accurate information about how teachers enact and make sense of alternatives to the current forms of instructional organization and effective pedagogical strategies must be sought. Schools today have the arduous task of developing the intellectual potential of a changing, diverse, and multilingual citizenry, while simultaneously preparing them for entry into a multifaceted labor market. To ensure excellence and equitable education to all students, particularly African Americans, school communities must reconceptualize teaching and learning. Thus, educational reform in the new millennium must challenge the implicit and explicit images, expectations, and attitudes of schooling held by today's educators, practitioners, and policymakers.

As this investigation has shown, the growing tension between excellence and equity can serve as a catalyst for efforts to restructure and improve America's public schools. In turn, the resulting wave of reform creates new images of and ideas about how schools should look and operate. It is hoped that the critical inquiry of the means of accomplishing this task will lead not only to the development of educational policies that create studentcentered classrooms but also to the development of school cultures that view students as partners in the learning process and not simply as merely receptacles for information.

It has been over 25 years since the stakeholders at Liberty High School set out to model social integration and racial harmony for a country suffering from social turmoil and deep racial division. Like many American cities in 1968, Jefferson Town was extremely divided along racial, ethnic, and economic lines. Unfortunately, not even a reform-minded school community such as it has been able to overcome these divisions. Perhaps as the residents of Jefferson Town continue to struggle with ways to provide a quality education to all of its students, the liberal, progressive, and radical ideals that led it to become one of the first communities to voluntarily integrate its schools will lead it to continue the fight for integration into the next millennium.

1For purposes of anonymity, the names of the school and town have been changed in this article.

2Unequal funding patterns are particularly relevant to race and class equity concerns. Most African American and low-income students attend school in low-wealth communities or in urban areas where the competing demands for tax dollars are great. In 1989, 52% of all students in the nation's inner-city schools were African American or Hispanic (Darling-Hammond, 1993). Thus, resource availability is an especially important prerequisite if educational access and opportunity are to exist in inner-city schools.

3Academic achievement was based upon students' reading scores on the statewide standardized exam given in the eighth grade.

REFERENCES

Apple, M. (1979). Ideology and curriculum. Boston: Routledge & Kegan-Paul. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Production in education, society, and culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Bowles, S., &. Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life. New York: Basic Books.

Braddock, J. H. (1989). Tracking of Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and White students: National patterns and trends. Baltimore: Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students.

Bryk, A., & Raudenbush, S. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Cooper, R. (1995). Liberty High School case report. Los Angeles: Research for Democratic School Communities, University of California-Los Angeles Graduate School of Education and Information Studies.

Cooper, R. (1996, April). The politics of change: Racial tension and conflict on school campusesStrategies to improve intergroup relations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

Cooper, R. (1997). A promising example of urban school reform: Detracking in a racially mixed high school. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1993). Inequality and access to knowledge. In J. A. Banks & C. M. Banks (Eds.), The handbook of multicultural education (pp. 49-65). New York: Macmillan.

Epps, E. (1983). Foreword. In R. Clark, Family life and school achievement: Why poor Black children succeed or fail. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Gibbs, J. T. (1988). Young, Black, and male in America. New York: Auburn House. Glazer, N. (1987). In search of excellence and equity in our nation's schools. Harvard Educational Review, 57(2), 196-198.

Hargreaves, A., Davis, J., & Fullan, M. (1991). Secondary school work cultures and educational change. Ontario: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Irvine, J. J. (1991). Black students and school failure. New York: Praeger. McGivney, J. H., & Moynihan, W. (1972). School and community. Teachers College Record, 74(2), 209-224.

Miles, M., & Louis, K. (1990, May). Mustering the will and skill for change. Educational Leadership, 57-61.

Murphy, J. (1993). Restructuring: In search of a movement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Nieto, S. (1995, April). On the brink between triumph and disaster: Exploring tensions between traditional secondary schools and academically unsuccessful students through two case studies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Oakes, J., Gamoran, A., & Page, R. (1991). Curriculum differentiation opportunities, outcomes, and meanings. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 570-608). New York: Macmillan.

Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (1992). Early lessons from the field. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(6), 448-454. Oakes, J., & Wells, A. (1991). Beyond sorting and stratification: Creating alternatives to tracking in racially mixed secondary schools. Grant proposal to the Lilly Foundation, New York, NY. Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Wells, A., Hirshberg, D., & Lipton, M. (1994, April). The case and its context: The situated nature of detracking reform. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Wheelock, A. (1994, October). Alternatives to tracking and ability grouping. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

Willie, C. V. (1987). When excellence and equity complement each other. Harvard Educational Review, 74(2), 205-207.

Robert Cooper, Johns Hopkins University, Center for Social Organization of Schools

Copyright Howard University Spring 1996
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved