Teachers and Teaching During Educational Restructuring and Reforms

  • Patrick J. W. McGinty
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE, volume 21)

Critical to understanding the work of teachers and the process of teaching during restructuring and reform is an appreciation of the historical, cultural and social, political, and ideological embeddedness of the expectations of teachers in national education policy as well as the “best practices” encouraged by individual reform and restructuring movements and agendas. Common to most discussions of restructuring and reform is the idea that school change — whether restructuring or reform — has seemingly occurred in “waves” as collective reactions to past or present political action or educational agendas and most often, this commonly accepted vision of “waves” of educational change agendas begins in 1983 with the publication of A Nation At Riskby the National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE, 1983).

Although the story differs slightly depending on the commitments, interests and intentions of the storytellers it remains generally consistent on the essential assumptions that there have been two distinct waves of reform. The “first wave,” the outcome of the publication of A Nation At Risksought to focus attention on the factors associated with managing schools and student progress — increasing graduation requirements, mandated curricula, time on task, and tightening administrative control (Cohen, 1989). The “second wave” of reform is often discussed in one of two ways: first, as an outright rejection of the programmatic suggestions contained within A Nation At Risk; or alternatively, as a reaction to the limited positive results of the “first wave” of reform. Given the varied origins of the “second wave” of reform, it came to include multiple initiatives and concerns and as a result wasn't a unified educational change initiative. However, despite the diversity of perspective and initial assumptions the commonality across the second wave was a generally accepted common goal — the radical, even systemic transformation of schools.


Educational Change School Reform School Organization School Change Teacher Burnout 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.Google Scholar
  2. Baines, L. A., & Stanley, G. K. (2006). The iatrogenic consequences of standards-based education. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79, 119–123.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, W. J. (1988). Our children and our country: Improving America schools and affirming the common culture. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  4. Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. N. (2002). Facing the challenges of whole school reform: New American schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Education.Google Scholar
  5. Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  6. Bidwell, C. (1965). Schools as formal organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 972–1023). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  7. Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S., & Easton, J. Q. (1998). Charting chicago school reform: Democratic localism as a lever for change. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  8. Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1992). Educational choice: Why it is needed and how it will work. In C. E. Finn & T. Rebarber (Eds.), Education reform in the ′90 s (pp. 36–52). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Church, M. B. (2000). Comprehensive school reform demonstration program: The third wave and its pre liminary effects. PREL Briefing Paper. Honolulu, HI: Pacific Resources for Education and Learning.Google Scholar
  10. Clarke, N. A., Stow, S., Ruebling, C., & Kayona, F. (2006). Developing standards-based curricula and assessments: Lessons from the field. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79, 258–261.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, M. (1989). Restructuring the system. Society, 26, 40–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corwin, R. G. (1973). Reform and organizational survival. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Dworkin, A. G. (1987). Teacher burnout in the public schools: Structural causes and consequences for children. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dworkin, A. G. (1997). Coping with reform: The intermix of teacher morale, teacher burnout, and teacher accountability. In B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (pp. 459–498). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Dworkin, A. G. (2001). Perspectives on teacher burnout and school reform. International Education Journal, 24(2), 69–78.Google Scholar
  16. Dworkin, A. G. (2008). School reform and teacher burnout. In J. H. Ballantine & J. Z. Spade (Eds.), Schools and society: A sociological approach to education (3rd ed., pp. 119–126). Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dworkin, A. G., Saha, L. J., & Hill, A. N. (2003). Teacher burnout and perceptions of a democratic school environment. International Education Journal, 4(2), 108–120.Google Scholar
  18. Dworkin, A. G., & Townsend, M. (1994). Teacher burnout in the face of reform: Some caveats in breaking the mold. In B. A. Jones & K. M. Borman (Eds.), Investing in United States schools: Directions for educational policy (pp. 68–86). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  19. Ebmeier, H., & Hart, A. W. (1992). The effects of a career-ladder program on school organizational process. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 261–281.Google Scholar
  20. Elmore, R. F., Peterson, P. L., & McCarthy, S. J. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning and school organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  21. Faddis, B. J., Beam, M., Hahn, K. J., Willardson, M., Sipe, D., & Ahrens-Gray, P. (2000). The implementation of the comprehensive school reform demonstration program: The work of 40 schools in seven midwest states. Naperville, IL: NCREL.Google Scholar
  22. Goldrick-Rab, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2005). What No Child Left Behind means for college access. In L. Parker (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 29 (pp. 107–130). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  23. Hall, P. M., & McGinty, P. J. W. (2002). Restructuring. In D.L. Levinson, P. W. Cookson, & A. R. Sadovnik (Eds.), Education and sociology: An encyclopedia (pp. 495–500). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  24. Hampel, R. (1987). The last little citadel. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  25. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1987). Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  26. Keltner, B. R. (1998). Funding comprehensive school reform. In Rand Issue Paper. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.Google Scholar
  27. LeCompte, M. D., & Dworkin, A. G. (1991). Giving up on school: Student dropouts and teacher burnouts. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  28. Lee, V. E., Dedrick, R. F., & Smith, J. B. (1991). The effect of the social organization of schools on teacher satisfaction. Sociology of Education, 64, 190–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1993). Effects of school restructuring on the achievement and engagement of middle-grade students. Sociology of Education, 66, 164–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1994). High school restructuring and student achievement. In Issues in restructur ing schools (Vol. 7, pp. 1–5, 16). Madison, WI: Center on Organizations and Restructuring of Schools.Google Scholar
  31. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B., (1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociology of Education, 68, 241–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (2001). Restructuring high schools for equity and excellence: What works. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lee, V. E., Smith, J. B., & Croninger, R.G. (1995). Another look at high school restructuring: More evidence that it improves student achievement and more insight into why. In Issues in restructuring schools (Vol. 9, pp. 1–10). Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, V. E., Smith, J. B., & Croninger, R.G. (1997). How high school organization influences the equitable distribution of learning in mathematics and science. Sociology of Education, 70, 128–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maranto, R. (2005). A tale of two cities: School privatization in Philadelphia and Chester. American Journal of Education, 111, 151–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Muncey, D. E., & McQuillan, P. J. (1996). Reform and resistance in schools and classrooms: an ethnographic view of the coalition of essential schools. New Haven, CT: Yale.Google Scholar
  37. Murphy, J. (1992). Restructuring America schools: An overview. In C. E. Finn & T. Rebarber (Eds.), Education reform in the '90s(pp. 3–20). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  38. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  39. Payzant, T. W. (2003). School vouchers: “Caveat emptor” knocks on the school house door: Beacon of choice or guarantor of inequality? College Board Review, 198, 4–13.Google Scholar
  40. Powell, A.G., Farrar, E., & Cohen, D. K. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  41. Ravitch, D., & Thernstrom, A. (1992). The democracy reader. NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  42. Saha, L. J., & Dworkin, A. G. (2004). Work conditions and burnout: The mitigating effects of work status and education. In R. Ruzicka, J. Ballantine, & J. A. Ruiz-Roman (Eds.), Key contexts for education and democracy in globalizing societies (p. A5 [Profession and Professionals]/1–8). Prague, The Czech Republic: Charles University, Argentura Action M.Google Scholar
  43. Schlesinger, A. M., Jr. (1991). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural society. New York: Whittle Books.Google Scholar
  44. Sizer, T. R. (1984). Horace compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  45. Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (2001). Success for all and comprehensive school reform: Evidence-based policies for urban education. Baltimore: Success For All Foundation.Google Scholar
  46. Stringfield, S., Ross, S., & Smith, L. (1996). Bold plans for school restructuring: Nine designs from new American schools. In S. Stringfield, S. Ross, & L. Smith (Eds.), Bold plans for school restructuring (pp. 1–8). Mahweh, NJ.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  47. Thurgood, L., Walter, E., Carter, G., Henn, S., Huang, G., Nooter, D., et al. (2003). NCES handbook of survey methods. Washington, DC: NCES.Google Scholar
  48. US Department of Education. (1990). National goals for education. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  49. US Department of Education. (1991). America 2000: An education strategy. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  50. US Department of Education. (1995). Goals 2000: A progress report. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  51. Viteritti, J. P. (2005). School choice: How an abstract idea became a political reality. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy, 2005 (pp. 137–173). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  52. Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wohlstetter, P., & Mohrman, S. A. (1994). School-based management: Promise and process. CPRE Finance Briefs 5. New Brunswick: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick J. W. McGinty
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sociology and AnthropologyWestern Illinois UniversityMacomb

Personalised recommendations