1
Turning Around
the Turnarounds
An Evaluation of the Models and
Resources Available in the
Turnaround Process
POLICY
BRIEF
Fall 2015
AUTHORS
Aniket Zinzuwadia
Abigail Gabrieli
Sophia Berg
Robert Capodilupo
Ben Delsman
Emma Dwight
Ifedayo Femojuro
Alex Gachanja
Tanner Gildea
Sophia Hunt
Nivedita Khandakar
Caroline Murphy
Theo Serlin
Catherine Zhang
ADVISORS
Kathryn Bussey
John Gabrieli

1
1 Executive Summary…………………………………………………………….3
2 Personnel………………………………………………………………………..5
2.1 Principals…………………………………………………………………………………5
2.1.1 Characteristics of Successful Principals………………………………………….....5
2.1.2 Recruiting Principals……………………………………………………………….10
2.1.2.1 Traditional Training Programs……………………………………………….10
2.1.2.2 Recruiting from Outside……………………………………………………..14
2.1.2.3 “Superheads”…………………………………………………………………15
2.1.2.4 Conclusions………………………………………………………………..…15
2.2 Teachers…………………………………………………………………………………15
2.2.1 Characteristics of Successful Teachers…………………………………………….16
2.2.2 Recruiting Teachers………………………………………………………………..21
2.2.3 Training Teachers………………………………………………………………….23
2.2.3.1 Making the Workplace a Home……………………………………………...24
2.2.3.2 Increased Support: Mentoring and Induction Programs for New Teachers ...29
3 Practices………………………………………………………………………..31
3.1 Targeted Student Support……………………………………………………………...31
3.1.1 Practical Implementation…………………………………………………………..32
3.1.2 Theoretical Models………………………………………………………………...34
3.2 Extended Learning Time……………………………………………………………….36
3.2.1 Allocating ELT…………………………………………………………………….37
3.2.2 Increasing Efficiency………………………………………………………………39
3.2.3 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...40
3.3 Standardized Testing Anxiety………………………………………………………….41
3.3.1 Strategies…………………………………………………………………………...42
3.3.1.1 External Motivators………………………………………………………….45
3.3.1.2 Parent Expectations…………………………………………………………..46
3.3.1.3 Teacher Expectations………………………………………………………...46
3.3.1.4 Efficacy………………………………………………………………………47
3.2.2 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...48
3.4 Student Voice……………………………………………………………………………49
3.4.1 Benefits…………………………………………………………………………….50
3.4.2 Theoretical Models………………………………………………………………...51
3.4.3 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...54
3.5 School Climate…………………………………………………………………………..55
3.5.1 High Expectations and Assessments……………………………………………….55
3.5.2 Safety………………………………………………………………………………56
3.5.3 Connectedness……………………………………………………………………...59
3.5.4 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...61
3.6 Funding………………………………………………………………………………….62
3.6.1 Practical Implementation…………………………………………………………..62
3.6.1.1 Massachusetts………………………………………………………………..62
TABLE OF CONTENTS

2
3.6.1.2 United States…………………………………………………………………64
3.6.2 Sustainability……………………………………………………………………….66
3.6.3 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...67
4 Outside Resources……………………………………………………………..69
4.1 Parental Involvement…………………………………………………………………...69
4.1.1 Parents in the Classroom……………………………………………………….......69
4.1.2 Parents at Home……………………………………………………………………71
4.1.3 Theoretical Models………………………………………………………………...72
4.2 Consulting Groups……………………………………………………………………...75
4.2.1 Theoretical Models………………………………………………………………...77
4.2.2 Specific Groups…………………………………………………………………….79
4.3 Outside Support Groups……………………………………………………………….81
4.3.1 Theoretical Models………………………………………………………………...81
4.3.2 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………...85
5 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………...86

3
1 Executive Summary
Given the millions of dollars – not to mention thousands of students’ educational
outcomes – riding on Massachusetts’ ability to turn around the schools selected to receive school
improvement grant funding, investigating how best to manage the turnaround process has
become a vital project for legislators in the Commonwealth. To that end, in this report, student
researchers at the Harvard Institute of Politics accepted a commission to investigate specific
strategies that turnaround schools can pursue in order to instantiate substantive, lasting changes
in their schools that will increase their students’ quality of education.
The guiding principle of this report is the notion that it is intended to serve as a useful
resource for individuals actually on the ground. The report therefore provides as much concrete
detail as possible on a variety of different theoretical or experimental models in each section, so
that educators have a realistic sense of what implementing these suggestions would require.
Additionally, it recognizes the variance between different turnaround situations and the need for
flexibility by providing a wide array of options, acknowledging that budgeting and concerns
specific to individual schools need to shape schools’ overarching turnaround strategies. As a
result, the report simply presents a long list of strategies, from which individuals with greater
familiarity with the particularities of their own situations can choose.
The report is broken up into three sections: personnel, practices, and outside resources.
In the first section, we consider what makes good principals and good teachers and how such
characteristics can be inculcated in individuals, while trying to avoid the pitfalls of tautologically
concluding that good personnel are those who participate in good practices and good practices
are those carried out by good personnel. Then, in the second section, we consider a variety of
best practices and how to implement them, including developing targeted, data-driven student

4
support, efficiently allocating extended learning time, mitigating standardized testing anxiety and
its effects on behavior, instituting roles for student voice, improve school climate, and using SIG
funds in useful, sustainable ways. Finally, our report concludes with a third section that
discusses how schools can take the most advantage of outside resources, such as parents,
consulting groups, and other outside support groups (like Teach for America or City Year). We
hope that by presenting this range of options, we can synthesize a vast body of academic
literature for practitioners who might otherwise lack the time to read through the bulk of work
produced on turnaround schools, and so act as a go-between for the researchers and advocates,
empowering the latter to take advantage of the former’s research.

5
2 Personnel
2.1 Principals
One of the key mechanics of the turnaround process is the replacement of the school’s
old principal with a new leader hand-picked to guide the school through this process. Indeed,
much of the literature on turnarounds focuses on the selection of a high-quality principal as one
of the most important factors in determining the level of success of the process; the principal
plays a lynchpin role in setting the tone of the turnaround and making vital practical decisions on
the ground. In this section, we will begin by trying to define what a good principal is and then
discuss how schools can ensure that the leader guiding their turnaround process is a high-quality
principal. This first segment will focus on what a good principal is, as opposed to what a good
principal does – two issues that are often conflated, resulting in the conclusion that good
principals are simply those who implement good programs in their turnaround, while good
programs are those implemented by good principals. Instead, this paper will make
recommendations about programming in 3. Practices, while this section will begin by discussing
the strictly personnel-related characteristics of successful principals. Then, the second segment
of this section will examine various traditional and non-traditional methods of recruiting and
training such principals.
2.1.1 Characteristics of Successful Principals
Before establishing what it is that good principals do, it is worth reiterating that the focus
of all educational reform should be improving student outcomes. Any discussion of school
leadership should therefore be viewed through the lens of how principals can help students learn.

6
The evidence generally shows that with regard to a principal’s impact, “most of it is indirect, that
is, mediated through teachers and others.”1
Since statistical path analysis by Leithwood, Harris,
and Hopkins shows teachers are the simplest and most likely avenue for principals to contribute
to student success,2
it makes sense to prioritize principal actions that teachers request or which
directly benefit teachers. This model that principals primarily affect students through teachers is
summarized graphically in Figure 1 below, taken from the same Leithwood, Harris, and Hopkins
review of school leadership literature.3
“Capacity” is a teacher’s instructional ability, as assessed
by an outside source. “Motivation and Commitment” and “Working Conditions” refer to a
teacher's assessment of themselves on those attributes, collected through an anonymous survey.
Figure 1
The principal behavior that most reliably improves teacher performance and student
outcomes is recognition of student and staff achievement. As one of her 26 behaviors for
1
Cotton, K. (2003). Principals and Student Achievement: What the Research Says., p.58. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)
2
Leithwood, K., Harris, A. & Hopkins, D. (2008) Seven strong claims about successful school leadership, School
Leadership & Management, 28:1, p.33
3
Ibid.

7
effective principals, Kathleen Cotton, a Research Associate at the School Improvement Program
of the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (NWREL) emphasizes establishing a positive
relationship between the visibility and frequency of public praise and outcome criteria such as
student motivation, classroom engagement, and staff morale. Similarly, Joseph Blase and Peggy
Kirby’s book Bringing Out the Best in Teachers lays out a blueprint for how principals can go
about implementing such behavior, with tips taken directly from teachers. Blase and Kirby
synthesized the teachers’ feedback into three suggestions: “Praise sincerely. Maximize the use of
nonverbal communication. Schedule time for teacher recognition.”4
Teachers describe the praise
as brief and informal, and note that with effective principals, these comments feel authentic and
natural, like these actions are “part of the principal’s character.”5
In practice, principals must be
involved enough in the instructional lives of their school to be aware of what practices are
working and merit recognition, allowing them to “praise sincerely.” Second, teachers have said
they especially appreciate small notes left on their desk or other permanent evidence of their
recognition, since such tangible forms of feedback allow them to look back on previous praise.
This finding also echoes the importance of “nonverbal communication” discussed above. Finally,
principals should incorporate recognition into their to-do lists and day-to-day routines. As this
section demonstrates, supporting teachers is perhaps the best way for principals to help students
learn, so it should be a priority in their work day.
This piece of advice is especially important for principals in turnaround schools. Their
teachers face greater challenges on a daily basis, so maintaining motivation through principal
praise is particularly valuable. In addition, students in turnaround schools would benefit from a
school culture where students and staff alike feel supported and encouraged by their principal. A
4
Blase, J., & Kirby, P. C. (1992). Bringing out the best in teachers: What effective principals do. p. 20. Newbury
Park, Calif: Corwin Press.
5
Ibid.

8
school environment of high expectations, positivity, and recognition will generate the enthusiasm
and goodwill necessary for the long-term viability of a turnaround project, as discussed more
thoroughly in the School Climate section of this report (Section 3.5).
Kathleen Cotton also writes that effective principals allow their teachers significant
autonomy. Again, this meets the previously established criterion that the most effective
mechanism for principals to support students is to support teachers. One self-evident way
principals can afford teachers greater autonomy is by not interfering in their internal
management of the classroom. Principals should refrain from unnecessary meddling in classroom
discipline or other non-instructional day-to-day practices. Cotton goes on to argue that another
vital way for principals to facilitate teacher autonomy is not just to avoid intruding in teachers’
areas of competence themselves but also “protecting staff from excessive intrusion by forces
outside the school.6
Principals can serve a valuable role by screening out external distractions,
allowing teachers to focus on their instructional responsibilities. Again, this will be particularly
valuable in turnaround schools, which will involve substantial changes that some parents may
not like. As a result, negative parental feedback may increase at the same time teachers will be
busy with curriculum changes, so it is important for principals to keep extraneous burdens off
their teachers’ plates. This is not to say that teachers should receive no communication from
parents – parental involvement provides valuable information and is important. Rather, the role
of the principal should be to sift through feedback from parents and distill the productive and
actionable suggestions while leaving out the emotional harangues. Teachers will thus be better
able to focus on their highest priority: the children in the classroom.
6
Cotton, K. (2003). Principals and Student Achievement: What the Research Says., p.70-71. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)

9
Another vital principal behavior is promoting a positive school culture, specifically
ensuring teacher motivation. Research has shown that if teachers are not satisfied with their
work, student performance will suffer.7
Additionally, much of the research on school leadership
reveals that principals play a crucial role in teacher satisfaction and motivation.8
Specifically
regarding school culture, substantial research has been done indicating that relationship between
teachers and their principal is the primary determinant of school culture.9
As previously
established, this culture will drive teachers’ satisfaction and motivation, which will in turn
strongly influence student outcomes. Anderman, Belzer, and Smith provide a statistical path
analysis indicating this same logical chain in their 1991 paper “Teacher Commitment and Job
Satisfaction: The Role of School Culture and Principal Leadership.” The authors gave over 700
teachers across three states a 108-point Likert scale survey where respondents answered
questions about their principal’s behavior, their perception of school culture, and their personal
satisfaction with their work. Of all the potential factors that could contribute to teacher
satisfaction, their model found the strongest statistical influence (beta=.44, p<.001) came from a
school culture that emphasized recognition. The more a teacher perceives a focus on recognition,
the more satisfied they will be with their work. Principals should therefore rank recognition of
students and staff as their highest priority. Additionally, principals should be confident that their
7
Bryk, A.S. & Driscoll, M.E. (1988, November). The high school as community: Contextual influences, and
consequences for students and teachers. Chicago: National Center on Effective Schools; Csikzentrnihalyi, M. &
McCormack, J. (1986, February). The influence of teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 67, 415-419; Firestone, W.A. &
Rosenblum, S. (1988). Building commitment in urban high schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10,
285-299; and Rosenholtz, Si. (1989). Teachers' work-place: The social organization of schools. New York:
Longman.
8
Lee, V.E., Dedrick, R.F. & Smith, J.B. (1989). The effect of the social organization of schools on teacher
satisfaction. Manuscript submitted for publication; Miskel, C.G., Fevurly, R. & Steward, J. (1979). Organizational
structures and processes, perceived school effectiveness, loyalty, and job satisfaction. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 15, 97-118; and Nidich, R.J. & Nidich, S.I. (1986). A study of school organizational climate variables
associated with teacher morale. Clearing House, 511,189-191.
9
Firestone, W.A. & Rosenblum, S. (1988). Building commitment in urban high schools. Educational Evaluation
and Policy Analysis, 10, 285-299; and Lee, V.E., Dedrick, R.F. & Smith, J.B. (1989). The effect of the social
organization of schools on teacher satisfaction. Manuscript submitted for publication.

10
efforts in this regard will actually increase teacher perception of recognition: the positive
relationship between this principal behavior and teacher perception is quite strong (beta=.48,
p<.001).
2.1.2 Recruiting Principals
Each turnaround is different and each principal will therefore face different challenges in
leading a turnaround school. As discussed in the previous section, principals are crucial to the
turnaround process – they are responsible for setting educational strategy and inspiring and
managing teachers, and they play a large role in creating positive school culture. In this section,
we identify three key components of effective turnaround principal preparation programs, which
will enable them to embody the characteristics of successful principals described above: key
competencies, experience and contextualization.
2.1.2.1 Traditional Training Programs
Firstly, such programs must reinforce basic competencies. The Southern Regional
Education Board (SREB) – a nonprofit that focuses on improving schools in the South –
identifies both “knowledge of the curriculum and instruction”10
and the ability to “use data and
root cause analysis to identify and solve problems of student achievement”11
as important
qualities of a turnaround principal. The latter requires that principals be familiar both with the
tests used to measure pupil progress, and with methods of statistical analysis to draw conclusions
from these results. Principals can and should use tests to see which teaching methods, and which
teachers, are truly improving student outcomes. Though such analysis could be done by external
10
Schmidt-Davis, J. & Bottoms, G. (2012) Turnaround High School Principals: Recruit, Prepare, and Empower
Leaders of Change, Southern Regional Education Board, 14.
11
Ibid. 19.

11
advisers, it is preferable that the principal him/herself has this ability, as it enables far closer
monitoring of student achievement, and ensures sustainability in the long run as school boards
face budget constraints. A 2014 report on school turnarounds in Massachusetts by the Institute
for Strategic Leadership and Learning – a Maryland based policy and consulting group –
identified the “ongoing collective review and use of student data to inform instructional
strategies” as a quality of successful turnarounds.12
Duke and Salmonowicz give the example of
a principal, who, owing to her understanding of the attainment tests used, realized that teachers
were abusing loopholes in the testing system to boost apparent performance, and thus was able to
better identify exactly how her school was failing.13
Principals that are familiar with data
analysis and with the standardized tests they use are much better placed to make decisions about
which policies – especially in the classroom – to pursue.
Similarly, training programs should focus on cultivating principals’ administrative skills.
Principals should have a strong grasp on the basic competencies of running a school:
organization, management and promoting job awareness. A report on turnaround efforts in the
UK emphasizes the importance of administrative competencies in combination with leadership
experience so principals can put their plans into action.14
Principals have to convince staff that
they are capable of actually putting their plans into practice. It is of the utmost importance that
principals inspire confidence in the turnaround project, but if staff and pupils feel that the school
is being poorly run – for example if teachers are weighed down by bureaucracy or if the campus
is not kept clean and orderly – it is unlikely that such confidence will manifest. As Salmonowicz
12
Lane, B., Unger, C. & Souvanna, P., (2014) Turnaround Practices in Action: A Three-Year Analysis of School
and District Practices, Systems, Policies, and Use of Resources Contributing to Successful Turnaround Efforts in
Massachusetts’ Level 4 Schools, Institute For Strategic Leadership and Learning, 11.
13
Duke, D., & Salmonowicz, M. (2010). Key Decisions of a First-year Turnaround Principal. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 38(1), 55.
14
Bush, T. & Glover, D. (2003) School Leadership: Concepts and Evidence, National College for School
Leadership, 34.

12
argues, “Students and teachers in low-performing schools likely have been subjected to
numerous failed reforms over the years. It is vital to convince them that this time will be
different.”15
Yet principal preparation cannot be reduced to a set of skills and practices. Each
turnaround is different. Potential turnaround principals must recognize what it means to identify
key problems, set an agenda for reform, and implement it. This understanding can be achieved
partly by examining case studies of turnaround schools, but actual experience shadowing or
working for a turnaround principal is preferable.16
Leadership is an exceedingly important part of
a principal’s job and it cannot entirely be taught in a seminar. A Center for American Progress
report identifies “experiential, clinical school-based opportunities” as a standard that principal
preparation programs must meet, as these experiences allow principals to “test their leadership
mettle in school settings over a significant period of time (at least six months), while receiving
support and feedback from experienced mentors.”17
Yet such placements are not just for the sake
of leadership experience. A 2013 Ph.D thesis from the University of Houston argues that “a
rigorous and relevant embedded internship experience … connects key turnaround leader
theories with actions and behaviors.”18
Principals need to understand how to bridge the gap
between theory and practice, and specifically how the more abstract elements of turnaround
theories – such as setting high expectations – work in reality. We therefore recommend that
before being assigned a turnaround school, principals spend substantial time shadowing
turnaround principals.
15
Salmonowicz, M. (2009). Meeting the Challenge of School Turnaround: Lessons from the Intersection of
Research and Practice. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(3), 21.
16
Ibid.
17
Cheney, G.R. & Davis, J. (2011) Gateways to the Principalship: State Power to Improve the Quality of School
Leaders. Center for American Progress, 10-11.
18
Campos, T.M., The Importance of Principal Preparation Programs to Increase Student Achievement, PhD.
Thesis, University of Houston, 86.

13
Turnaround principals must also gain a nuanced understanding of the context of the
school they will be working in. The SREB claims turnaround principals should work to fully
understand both the school in question and the community it serves, using both qualitative and
quantitative data, in order to better identify what it is that the school needs.19
A report on
turnaround schools in Arizona explains that low expectations about the academic achievement of
certain communities can stymie their success – by discouraging both teachers and the students
themselves – and argues that it is imperative that principals be aware of such stereotypes and be
prepared to confront them.20
On a simpler level, turnaround principals need to understand the
superficial and undergirding problems confronting their school, which vary hugely from case to
case. For example, reading problems are feature of many – though not all – failing schools, but
are not always driven by the same factors, and cannot always be remedied the same way: reading
problems may be due to poor support for students with learning difficulties, difficulty with ESL
programs, or just sub-par teaching. Each of these circumstances would require a different
strategy.
One major benefit of any training program for principals is that it will create a network
that will be an important resource for turnaround principals. The SREB report emphasizes that
“training new leaders in well-organized cohorts creates a professional community to which they
can turn for advice and sharing experiences.”21
This network is especially important as it is clear
that principal preparation cannot be reduced to a simple checklist of competencies. A successful
turnaround hinges in part on such unquantifiable elements as the creation of high expectations. If
19
Schmidt-Davis, J. & Bottoms, G. (2012) Turnaround High School Principals: Recruit, Prepare, and Empower
Leaders of Change, Southern Regional Education Board 19.
20
Ylimaki, R., Brunderman, L., Bennett, J., & Dugan, T. (2014). Developing Arizona Turnaround Leaders to Build
High-Capacity Schools in the Midst of Accountability Pressures and Changing Demographics. Leadership and
Policy in Schools, 13(1), 28-60.
21
Schmidt-Davis, J. & Bottoms, G. (2012) Turnaround High School Principals: Recruit, Prepare, and Empower
Leaders of Change, Southern Regional Education Board 22.

14
principals can turn to others for advice, they will be better placed to navigate these issues.
Clinical placements in schools can also produce the same sorts of professional networks, as such
placements will connect new turnaround principals with more experienced school leaders, to
whom they can later turn to for advice.
2.1.2.2 Recruiting from Outside
Several researchers have recommended recruiting from outside the usual envelope of
principals and assistant principals. For instance, Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms recommend that
districts identify talented teachers and put them through intensive, multi-year training
programs.22
Similarly, a report from the University of Virginia Partnership for Leaders in
Education argues that school districts should recruit principals from outside the traditional
educational pipeline. There are certain advantages to such approaches: in a larger pool of
candidates it is more likely that some will have the necessary abilities, and these hires may have
a different view and approach to that of jaded older principals, and could be better placed to
enact radical change in failing schools. However, such recruits would require a far longer, more
intensive and more expensive training process. Even after this, as the UVA team reports,
“imported leaders typically need some time to get up to speed on their new setting.”23
Furthermore, we cannot be completely sure whether the human skills portfolio these candidates
have will translate well onto being a principal – the best test of competency at being a turnaround
principal is competency at being a principal.24
Potential principals from outside the traditional
pipeline to principalship should be encouraged, but this is an expensive and risky policy to
22
Ibid.
23
Kowal, J. & Hassel, E.A. (2011) Importing leaders for school turnarounds: Lessons and opportunities, University
of Virginia’s Darden/Curry Partnership for Leaders in Education, 8.
24
Rhim, L. M. (2012) No Time to Lose: Turnaround Leader Performance Assessment. Lincoln IL Center on
Innovation & Improvement, 2.

15
pursue on a grand scale.
2.1.2.3 “Superheads”
In the UK, policymakers have attempted to create a corps of principals specifically for
turnarounds. Referred to as “superheads,” these principals are successively sent to failing
schools. When they have turned their school around, they are sent to another. The main
advantage of this program is that it makes sure that the most talented principals are used
effectively. However, this program also has many disadvantages. While there has only been
minimal research done on this topic, researchers have found that superheads are capable of
bringing about improvements to schools in the short term. However, they create a culture of
dependency within the school, and as a result these improvement are rarely sustainable in the
long term, after the superhead moves on.25
2.1.2.4 Conclusions
In sum, we can cultivate successful turnaround principals through training programs that
reinforce basic competencies, allow principals to develop leadership skills and supportive
networks through placements, and prepare them to identify the specific challenges of the school
they will work with. Though there are several unorthodox methods of recruiting and using
talented principals, none of these schemes have proven themselves to be truly effective or
efficient. Our limited resources should be focused on best preparing the most able principals we
have to tackle the manifold challenges of turning around failing schools.
25
Clancy, J., (2002) It’s Not So Super in the Long Term, Times Educational Supplement, 4474, 7.

16
2.2 Teachers
Teachers are on the front lines of our school system, given that they are “the chief agents
of implementing any instructional policy.”26
Differences in teacher quality can provide up to a
50-percentile improvement in student performance, and these improvements accumulate as
students are taught by subsequent teachers.27
Teachers are an integral component of the
turnaround process: recent statistics from Massachusetts have shown that the more teachers
replaced in a turnaround, the greater the gains in student test scores. Schools in Massachusetts
that replaced 50% or more of their teachers met their performance goals 89% of the time, while
schools that replaced between a third and a half of their teachers met their goals 33% of the time.
Schools replacing less than a third of their teachers only met their goals 18-20% of the time.28
But simply bringing in new teachers and getting rid of old teachers is far from a cure-all;
sometimes, teachers from before were hampered by other factors from achieving positive
educational results, and new teachers may lack sensitivity to the issues that a school has faced
over time. Given teachers’ importance to student performance, especially in turnaround schools,
it is critical that schools understand how to attract and retain qualified teachers, and how to
provide them with mechanisms for improvement once they are in the workplace.
2.2.1 Characteristics of Successful Teachers
Variables measuring teacher knowledge and skills, from certification status to
disciplinary preparation, seem to have stronger influence on student achievement than factors
26
Cohen, David K. "Revolution in One Classroom." Journal of Education Policy 5, no. 5 (1990): p. 120
27
Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future studentacademic
achievement.
28
Urbon, S. (2013, December 22). Hard numbers: Turnaround schools that remove most teachers have best records.

17
such as class size, teacher salaries, and student to teacher ratio.29
As Linda Darling-Hammond,
Professor of Education at the Stanford Graduate School of Education explains, this seems to
indicate that teacher knowledge, skills, and preparation matter for student achievement. Students
from low-income families are especially dependent on their teachers for academic success.30
This is unfortunate, since low-income schools disproportionately bear the effects of unqualified
teachers. As summarized by Susan Moore Johnson of the Harvard Graduate School of
Education, “high-income schools routinely get ‘better’ teachers—’better’ by almost any measure,
whether it be years of experience, degrees earned, selectivity of undergraduate institution, or
current salary level.”31
In other words, poor student performance in low-income schools may be
partially attributable to higher proportions of unqualified teachers that negatively impact student
success.
While it is clear that effective teachers can dramatically improve the performance of their
students, it is unclear what factors contribute to teacher effectiveness. Among variables assessing
teacher quality, teacher certification status and its impact on student achievement levels has
generated substantial debate. In theory, certification status makes a difference in teacher
effectiveness because it ensures teachers have adequate knowledge of the subject matter they
will teach. Students who receive instruction from a teacher who is not certified in their field may
receive lower quality education if their teacher does not truly understand the material they are
teaching. Darling-Hammond found that teacher certification status is “very significantly and
positively” correlated with student outcomes.32
Additionally, the less socially advantaged the
29
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education policy analysis archives, 8, 1.
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/392/515
30
Downey, D. B., von Hippel, P. T., & Becket, A. B. (2004). Are schools the great equalizer? Cognitive inequality
during the summer months and the school year. American Sociological Review, 69(5), 613-635.
31
Johnson, S. M. “Having It Both Ways: Building the Capacity of Individual Teachers and Their Schools.” Harvard
Educational Review 82.1 (2012): 107-122.
32
Ibid.

18
students, the less likely their teachers hold full certification and a degree in their field. An
analysis of New York City schools revealed that the virtual elimination of newly hired
uncertified teachers, in addition to an influx of academically strong teachers from alternative
certification programs, substantially narrowed the gap between the qualifications of teachers in
high-poverty schools and low-poverty schools. The New York Board of Regents abolished
temporary licenses for uncertified teachers (except for limited waivers), created alternative
certification routes, and developed the Teaching Fellows program in collaborated with The New
Teacher Project. Only five percent of newly hired Teaching Fellows and TFA teachers in 2003
failed the Liberal Arts and Sciences (LAST) exam on their first attempt, in comparison to 16.2
percent of newly hired traditional teachers and 32.5 percent of uncertified teachers. In 2000, the
difference in math SAT scores between teachers in the highest-poverty decile of schools and
counterparts in the lowest-poverty decile of schools was 43 points. By 2005, this gap had
narrowed to 23 points. The improvements in teacher qualifications, especially among the poorest
schools, appear to have resulted in improved student achievement. The analysis suggests that the
recruitment and retention of teachers with stronger measurable characteristics, including
certification, can lead to improved student learning.33
However, the idea that teacher certification status leads to better student outcomes has
been met with skepticism. Although much existing literature establishes correlation between
teacher certification and student achievement, there are too many confounding variables to
definitively prove that the two are causally related. Indeed, at the end of her study, Darling-
Hammond acknowledges that other factors could have affected her results, noting that while her
33
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., Rockoff, J., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). The narrowing gap in New York City
teacher qualifications and its implications for student achievement in high‐poverty schools. Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management, 27(4), 793-818.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w14021.pdf

19
study tested for some competing explanations, it could not fully test all of the different variables
at play.34
Joshua Angrist from MIT’s Department of Education and Jonathan Guryan from the
University of Chicago Graduate School of Business assert that requiring teaching candidates to
pass certification tests may unnecessarily restrict entry into the teaching profession and harm
teacher supply. Not only is the cost of testing likely to deter high-quality applicants from
teaching, but test requirements may also disqualify applicants with valuable attributes and
schools who schools would otherwise seek to hire.35
In the case of New York City public
schools, the abolishment of temporary licenses for uncertified teachers was coupled with
vigorous efforts to recruit strong candidates through alternative certification paths. Additionally,
at the time there was a considerable increase in teacher salaries in New York City. These
measures may have offset any potential decrease in supply spurred by stricter requirements.
Some academics such as Gloria Ladson-Billings stress the importance of culturally responsive
teaching, but raise concerns about cultural bias in the performance-assessment of teachers.36
In
2014, the Boston Globe reported that students of color make up only 13 percent of the 22,000
students enrolled in teacher training programs across Massachusetts. In the state university
system, the largest producer of teachers and administrators in Massachusetts, students of color
account for less than 8 percent of enrollment in teacher preparation programs at nearly every
state campus.37
In 2011, the gap between the percentage of nonwhite students and nonwhite
34
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education policy analysis archives, 8, 1.
35
Angrist, J. D., & Guryan, J. (2008). Does teacher testing raise teacher quality? Evidence from state certification
requirements. Economics of Education Review, 27(5), 483-503.
36
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research
Journal, 32(3), 465–491.
37
Massachusetts teacher preparation programs lack diversity - The Boston Globe. (n.d.). Retrieved December 6,
2015, from https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/04/27/massachusetts-teacher-preparation-programs-lack-
diversity/t2NIRcK8GWvoBc6FqywUXM/story.html

20
teachers in Massachusetts was a staggering 29% (see chart below).
Clearly, Massachusetts has a long way to go in promoting a more diverse teaching force.
Ultimately, the relationship between teacher certification testing and student achievement may
have to do with test content. Certain knowledge requirements for new teachers may more
accurately predict classroom performance.38
38
Buddin, R., & Zamarro, G. (2009). Teacher qualifications and student achievement in urban elementary schools.
Journal of Urban Economics, 66(2), 103-115.

21
Considering these viewpoints, schools undergoing the turnaround process should seek to
hire certified teachers with experience in their designated subject areas. Additionally, turnaround
schools should also actively seek to hire a diverse teaching force, especially because the student
population in low-income schools is disproportionately filled with minority students. For
example, the twelve Boston Public Schools designated Level 4 in 2010 had a student population
that was 92% black or Hispanic, 96% percent eligible for free or reduced lunch, and 40% limited
English proficient. The value of having multilingual teachers in a school that serves students
with limited English proficiency is obvious, but in general, a more diverse workforce can help
teachers better connect with students.
2.2.2 Recruiting Teachers
By now, it has become clear that wealthier, whiter schools have disproportionately more
qualified teachers than low-income schools that serve mostly minority students. Part of this
problem is due to poor hiring practices in urban school districts. These poor hiring practices,
especially late hiring, inhibit high-poverty urban schools from obtaining qualified teachers even
when there is a surplus of them in the labor market. Approximately one-third of new teachers are
hired more than a month before school starts; one-third are hired in the month before school
begins; and one-third are hired after school is in session. A survey conducted by Edward Liu and
Susan Moore Johnson from the Harvard Graduate School of Education found that 48.9% of
teachers in Massachusetts are hired either during the month before school starts or after school
has already started.39
This late hiring may push prospective teachers to seek work in surrounding
wealthier, whiter suburbs where they are able to secure positions earlier on in the year.
39
Liu, Edward, & Johnson, Susan Moore. (2006). New Teachers' Experiences of Hiring: Late, Rushed, and
Information-Poor. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(3), p. 345

22
Additionally, late hiring causes teachers and schools to rush into decisions without proper
evaluation. School districts may choose to hire unlicensed candidates, even when there are more
qualified ones available. Teachers, in a hurry to secure a job before the school year begins, may
enter positions that do not align with their skills and interests. This is unfortunate because
teachers are more effective when they are well matched with their work environment and their
teaching assignment.40
Additionally, Johnson notes, “Teachers tend to leave such dysfunctional
contexts for schools where they can achieve what they set out to do in their career, such as
inspire students, convey knowledge, and serve society.” These teachers frequently leave to serve
schools that have a generally wealthier, whiter student population.41
Job dissatisfaction thus leads
to high rates of teacher attrition in underperforming school and causes qualified teachers to move
to wealthier, whiter areas.42
Nicole Simon, Susan Moore Johnson, and Stefanie Reinhorn of the Harvard Graduate
School of Education conducted a survey of six high-poverty Massachusetts schools that had
achieved the highest ranking in Massachusetts’ accountability system in order to analyze their
hiring practices. Two of these schools had recently emerged from turnaround. They found that
these schools assessed teaching candidates through a “two-way hiring process which provided
both schools and candidates with opportunities to exchange information and assess one another
before making an offer or signing a contract.”43
Each school had candidates go through hiring
processes with multiple steps, such as an interview with a principal, a teaching demonstration, a
school visit where prospective candidates interacted with teachers at the school, etc. This
40
Ibid.
41
Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The Schools Teachers Leave: Teacher Mobility in Chicago
Public Schools. Consortium on Chicago School Research.
42
Simon, N. S., Johnson, S. M., & Reinhorn, S. K. (2015). The Matchmaking Process: Teacher Hiring in Six
Successful, High-Poverty, Urban Schools.
43
Simon, N. S., Johnson, S. M., & Reinhorn, S. K. (2015). The Matchmaking Process: Teacher Hiring in Six
Successful, High-Poverty, Urban Schools.

23
comprehensive process gave teachers and administrators better opportunity to assess fit.
Principals were upfront about challenges at the school so teachers knew what to expect
beforehand.
From these findings, there are a couple of practices that schools can adopt to improve
their teaching pool. Simon, Johnson, and Reinhorn recommend that schools be given increased
autonomy over teaching hiring and transfer so principals can better assess teacher fit. This means
that hiring school be more school-based, instead of being conducted by a central district office.
Teacher assignments should match their subject knowledge and preparation and principals
should be clear about challenges at the school.44
This way, teachers are prepared to tackle
challenges head on, and are more likely to stay in the school to help tackle these problems long
term.
2.2.3 Training Teachers
When it comes to teacher development, most researchers accept a common principle: we
must think critically about how and why we train teachers, in order to ensure that our current
teaching methods and how we teach teachers how to teach are appropriate for the rapidly
changing and modernized world. Often, policymakers and administrators assume that the
solution for improving teacher quality is to increase teacher compensation. They believe that
increasing teacher pay will attract more qualified personnel to the teaching profession thus
improve student performance. However, this theory is flawed, in that it relies on three shaky and
largely unsubstantiated premises: (1) compensation is the main driving force in career selection
and low pay is the primary reason why “highly qualified” personnel stray from the field, (2) an
44
Ibid.

24
individual’s credentials (degree attainment, experience in a field) are the most important factors
for teaching qualification (3) these “more qualified” individuals automatically increase student
performance, regardless of the level or type of teaching preparation or development they receive
prior to entering the classroom. While increasing teacher pay may create incentive for more
individuals to enter and remain in the teaching profession, it does not directly translate to these
individuals being more effective teachers overall. In this section, we will analyze ways to train
and retain high quality teachers that go beyond simply increasing compensation. Specifically, we
believe that administrators ought to pay more attention to improving working conditions for
teachers, creating a strong culture of collaboration between teachers, students, and
administrators, and implementing effective mentoring and induction programs for newcomers.
2.2.3.1 Making the Workplace a Home
First, a school’s cultural environment strongly affects the quality of teaching provided,
regardless of who is delivering that instruction. Equipping teachers with a positive support
network within a school significantly improves performance and is tied with overall increased
student achievement. In Project on the Next Generation of Teachers, Johnson et. al argue that the
culture of a school plays a distinguishable role in how teachers perform – to the extent that
taking a teacher from a school with a strong positive culture to one with a strong negative culture
adversely affects their effectiveness in the classroom. This decrease in effectiveness is not
because that teacher becomes any pedagogically worse; rather, it is because they no longer have
a shared code of behavior and high expectations between students and teachers that they can
institutionalize in their classroom (Johnson et. al, 2011, pg. 29-31). As shown in Figure 2 below,
teachers become especially sensitive to their work environment when the working conditions

25
provided to them are not adequate. The less adequate the conditions are at work, the more likely
a teacher is to transfer to a different school. This constant pattern of turnovers is especially
detrimental to turnaround schools, as it robs them of opportunities for students and personnel to
develop close relationships, as well as individuals who are personally invested in implementing
and seeing through changes and programs to improve these at-risk schools. Turnaround schools
often attempt to compensate for shortages of high-performing teachers by providing financial
incentives to teachers from other schools to transfer to theirs or by lobbying for successful
teachers to be reassigned to their schools.45
However, this approach is narrow and fails to
recognize that student success is mostly dependent on how well teachers and principles are
working together to produce a working environment in which everyone has a personal stake in
promoting student achievement; constant teacher reassignment. Simply put, context matters: as
Johnson et al. report, “changing the people without changing the context in which they work is
not likely to substantially improve the school.”46
45
Johnson SM, Kraft MA, Papay JP. How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working
conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record [Internet].
2012;114(10): 32.
46
Johnson, S. M. "Having it both ways: Building the capacity of individual teachers and their schools." Harvard
Educational Review (2012) 82(1): 102.

26
Figure 2. Histogram Showing the Sample Probability That Teachers Intend to Transfer, by
the Peer-Average Conditions of Work Rating, With the Fitted Relationship Between the
Probability of Transfer and the Conditions of Work Overlaid
Turnaround schools can create this collaborative working environment by following and
implementing a number of measures-- with school and district administration as the catalysts for
these changes to take place in their schools and teachers and students at the center of executing
them at the classroom level. In The Workplace Matters: Teacher Quality, Retention and
Effectiveness, Susan Johnson sets benchmarks for improving working environments for teachers.
Below, Figure 3 illustrates her conclusions on how turnaround schools can reform their current
practices and structures to be more inclusive of teacher needs and how they can improve these
practices and structures to reduce turnover and increase morale.

27
Figure 347
More specifically, conditions within the classroom itself are highly linked to teacher
success. The subjects a teacher is assignment to teach and the load forced on them have lasting
impact on teacher quality. Out-of-field teaching and split assignments make the work place
especially stressful and overwhelming for teachers. Out-of-field teaching – requiring teachers to
teach subjects outside their field of training or expertise – has become a problem in today’s
school system; nineteen percent of teachers in the United States are tasked with teaching outside
their minor, in math or other related fields. Johnson argues that teachers who are forced to teach-
out-of field are significantly more likely to see teaching a stressful profession and, as a result,
drop out of the profession. Turnaround schools ought to assign teachers to teach only the subjects
47
Johnson, S. M. The Workplace Matters: Teacher Quality, Retention and Effectiveness. Washington, DC: National
Education Association, 2006. (NEA research working paper).

28
they specialize in (e.g. math teachers should only teach math, English teachers only teach
language skill classes). Similarly, split assignments pose serious challenges for teachers –
particularly for new teachers. Split assignments force teachers to teach different grades, subjects,
classrooms, or even at different schools. Turnaround schools ought to eliminate split
assignments, and equip each teacher with a reliable classroom and one subject matter within their
area of expertise.
A network of trust and inter-reliance creates a constant, self-sustaining system of
professional development where teachers are routinely learning from each other. Schools’
current programs of teacher development would much more effective if supplemented by this
strong network and culture of unity. In such an environment, teachers would have opportunities
to collaborate in a variety of ways, such as showing each other strategies, discussing student
performance, deciding how best to accommodate different student needs, exchange ideas for
future experimentation. It is imperative that school leadership and district leadership create this
strong culture of interconnectedness with and between teachers in order to cultivate a school
environment in which teachers are a team Currently, collaboration between teachers is difficult
because division between different departments, tight school schedules, and isolation between
teachers of different grades and tracking levels. To solve this and promote teacher collaboration,
turnaround schools ought to:
(1) have interdepartmental meetings between different disciplines (math
department and language departments working together)
(2) allot time during the school day for teachers to meet and work together
(3) implement Peer Assistance and Review programs

29
(4) implement performance assessments with proven teaching practices and
assessments (lesson plans, assignments, examples of student work)
(5) provide constant feedback from department heads and school administration
In sum, the first step of effective professional development is to create a welcoming
environment for teachers by ensuring that working conditions are fully met and by creating a
school culture in which each teacher has a personal stake in the success of other teachers and in
each of the student.
2.2.3.2 Increased Support: Mentoring and Induction Programs for New Teachers
Within this culture of connectedness, schools ought to capitalize on opportunities to train
new teachers by implementing mentoring and induction programs. In Mentoring and Tutoring:
Partnership in Learning, Robert Bullough argues that the most effective mentoring programs are
those in which a new teacher has “a mentor in the same subject or collaboration with other
teachers on instruction” and is able to be “part of an external network of teachers.”48
To be most
effective, mentoring must be mentoring programs should be “part of a comprehensive induction
program that emphasized inquiry into practice.”49
Mentoring programs ought to be one-on-one,
with the mentor and mentee both being from the same area of expertise. One highly-acclaimed
mentoring program profiled by researchers Pam Grossman, Clarissa Thompson, and Sheila
Valencia allows teachers to be free from administrative duties for a period of time so that they
can observe experienced teachers’ classes. Additionally, in this program, highly-rated veteran
teachers hold monthly seminars to share information and strategies for effective teaching.
Turnaround schools should implement similar programs, where veteran teachers are assigned
48
Bullough, R. V. “Mentoring and New Teacher Induction in the United States: A Review and Analysis of Current
Practices.” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 20(1) (2012): 55-74.
49
Ibid.

30
greater responsibility and autonomy to train incoming teachers. A teacher in this program noted
that what made the program most effective was that it had a “supportive department and
department chair and a designated mentor teacher within the same department.”50
50
Grossman, P., Thompson, C. and Valencia, S. District Policy and Beginning Teachers: Where the Twain Shall
Meet. Washington: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, 2001.

31
3 Practices
3.1 Targeted Student Support
One practice frequently cited as a hallmark of successful turnarounds is the
implementation of targeted, data-driven interventions for individual students.51
Currently, the
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education uses the Early Warning
Indicator Index system, a data-driven system to identify high school students who are at risk of
not graduating on time. This system is being expanded through the funding of the federal
Longitudinal Data System Grant Program to identify K-12 students that are potentially off track
for their grade level or developmental age, including those students who are not on track to
graduate with their peers and are identified as potential dropouts.52
A three year analysis of
Massachusetts’ schools and districts in turnaround efforts show that one of the key practices that
has distinguished the Massachusetts Achievement Gain schools which exited Level 4 was the
provision of targeted instructional interventions and support for all of the students who show that
they need additional support.53
Achievement Gain schools had implemented student assessments
for the provision of student-specific tiered interventions, student-specific supports informed by
data and student-specific needs, and has creatively allocated personnel, time, and resources to
continue effectively monitoring student data and needs. Non-Gain Schools may be reviewing
student data, but it is in way that is limited and does not allow for a system of assessment that
51
Turnaround Practices in Action. A Three-Year Analysis of School and District Practices, Systems, Policies, and
Use of Resources Contributing to Successful Turnaround Efforts in Massachusetts’ Level 4 Schools. (2014) Institute
for Strategic Leadership and Learning, 14.
52
Massachusetts’ System for Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, & Support. (2015). Retrieved November 4,
2015, from http://www.mass.gov/edu/government/departments-and-boards/ese/programs/accountability/support-for-
level-3-4-and-5-districts-and-schools/school-and-district-turnaround/turnaround-in-massachusetts/system-for-
differentiated-recognition-accountability-and-.html
53
Turnaround Practices in Action. A Three-Year Analysis of School and District Practices, Systems, Policies, and
Use of Resources Contributing to Successful Turnaround Efforts in Massachusetts’ Level 4 Schools. (2014) Institute
for Strategic Leadership and Learning, 6.

32
can frequently respond to student needs and inform instruction.54
3.1.1 Practical implementation
There is a nationally-used multi-tiered model of support, widely known as response to
intervention (RTI), that reacts to the academic and social behavior needs of students, and
provides a continuum of support so that the intensity of the intervention matches the needs of the
students.55
There are many variations of the multi-tiered model of support, and it can be adapted
to best fit each school. Using a multi-tiered model of support allows schools to provide support
to all students when they demonstrate need, so they are able to access the help they need before
falling far enough behind to qualify for special education. If the initial, general supports fail to
help students, the multi-tier model leaves room to give more students more support
individualized, intensive methods. Without having a multi-tier support system in place, students
are more prone to fall behind without receiving the level of support they need. The multi-tier
model generally consists of universal (also known as Tier 1 or primary prevention) supports,
supplemental targeted (secondary or Tier 2) interventions, and intensive, individualized
interventions (tertiary or Tier 3). In some cases, schools have chosen to add a fourth tier in the
model along with the standard three tiers to deal with specialized needs.56
The universal supports, or Tier 1, of the multi-tier model focuses on putting in place high
quality instruction through competent personnel. The central concern under Tier 1 supports is to
54
Turnaround Practices in Action. A Three-Year Analysis of School and District Practices, Systems, Policies, and
Use of Resources Contributing to Successful Turnaround Efforts in Massachusetts’ Level 4 Schools. (2014) Institute
for Strategic Leadership and Learning, 14.
55
Crepeau-Hobson, F., Bianco, M. (2012). Response to Intervention: Promises and Pitfalls for Gifted Students With
Learning Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(3), 144. doi: 10.1177/1053451212454005
56
Ibid.

33
make certain that any difficulties students face are not caused by the instruction they are given.57
This support system focuses on explicitly teaching and reinforcing more prosocial behavior,
responding consistently to inappropriate behavior and using data to guide decision making, and
ideally should be implemented in all settings and across all staff in the school.58
As soon as high-
quality instruction is in place, students should be regularly screened on universal academic
standards. Consideration towards more intensive support is given to the students who do not
meet the benchmarks set for their grade level.59
The Tier 2 interventions are put in place to support students who do not respond to the
universal intervention or show through screenings that they need additional support. Tier 2
remains within the supports of the general education system, but gives more attention to the areas
of instruction in which students are struggling, and provides students with small group settings.
Through the use of small-group instruction students should be given opportunities to develop
higher order thinking, problem-solving skills, research skills, organizational skills, and reading
fluency skills.60
The supports of Tier 2 can be provided through varying types of instruction and
enrichment opportunities that are beneficial to the students’ areas of need. To benefit the social
needs of students behavioral/social-emotional interventions should also be put into action in Tier
2.61
Examples of Tier 2 targeted group interventions can also include check-in/check-out systems
and, for academics, small-group reading instructions.62
The intensive, individualized Tier 3 supports are put in place for students who do not
57
Ibid.
58
Campbell, Amy. (2008). “Enhancing Effects of Check-in/Check-out With Function-Based Support.” Council for
Exceptional Children, 33 (4), 234.
59
Crepeau-Hobson, F., Bianco, M. (2012). Response to Intervention: Promises and Pitfalls for Gifted Students With
Learning Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(3), 144. doi: 10.1177/1053451212454005
60
Ibid.
61
Ibid.
62
Campbell, Amy. (2008). “Enhancing Effects of Check-in/Check-out With Function-Based Support.” Council for
Exceptional Children, 33 (4), 234.

34
respond to targeted group interventions. These individualized supports are based on results of a
functional behavior assessment, are comprehensive in nature, and require significant personnel
time and resources.63
High-poverty schools typically offer a variety of interventions designed to
help these struggling students, including supplementary reading and mathematics programs,
extended learning time, student incentives, tutoring sessions, after-school homework centers,
summer school programs, in-class grouping strategies, special counseling, mentors and
diagnostic testing.64
Instructional interventions have the potential to affect different students in
different ways. In some models of the RTI, Tier 3 is categorized as special education. 65
3.1.2 Theoretical Models
It is very important to note, however, that these and other interventions have been found
in both low-performing schools and successful turnaround schools. The mere presence of
interventions is insufficient to ensure improved student achievement. It is necessary to find
information regarding how students respond to interventions, especially in the many low-
achieving schools where students often receive multiple interventions. Instruction and
intervention should be provided in direct response to students’ academic areas of need, identified
through focused analysis of student and/or skill-specific assessments. In Massachusetts,
turnaround schools that failed to achieve gains are often collecting student data, but not using
this data to provide all students with instruction and interventions in direct response to their
academic needs. These schools need to find an approach for using their data to create more
63
Ibid.
64
Ibid.
65
Crepeau-Hobson, F., Bianco, M. (2012). Response to Intervention: Promises and Pitfalls for Gifted Students With
Learning Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(3), 144. doi: 10.1177/1053451212454005

35
student-specific instruction.66
There are important characteristics of the multi-tier model of interventions that are more
likely to be sustained over time and are more beneficial in outcomes, and ensure that
interventions can be completed in a timely fashion and be responsive to individual needs. Most
of all, schools should gather individualized data on student performance and should use it to
guide decision making. Screenings can be used to identify which students are most likely to
benefit from supports, and then the frequent and regular monitoring of progress can be used to
assess outcomes. Using these data-based decision rules can help match the needs of the student
with the methods of intervention used.67
In addition, targeted interventions should be familiar to
all staff and students within a school, and any materials needed to implement them should be
readily available. When everyone is familiar with the intervention, and all materials being
accessible, interventions can be implemented for a student less than week after the need is
identified.68
To help at-risk and struggling students, schools should implement a multi-tier model of
interventions, as described in the previous section, which should offer supports in a level of
varieties, from being in place for all students school-wide to being highly concentrated and
focused on the needs of a single student. Putting in place effective support systems and the
screening and monitoring systems that go along with it can be extremely beneficial, if not
necessary, for the turnaround of schools. Having a multi-tier model of support and interventions
in place allows for all students to receive the level of support that they need in order to succeed.
66
Turnaround Practices in Action. A Three-Year Analysis of School and District Practices, Systems, Policies, and
Use of Resources Contributing to Successful Turnaround Efforts in Massachusetts’ Level 4 Schools. (2014). Institute
for Strategic Leadership and Learning, 10.
67
Campbell, Amy. (2008). Enhancing Effects of Check-in/Check-out With Function-Based Support. Council for
Exceptional Children, 33 (4), 234.
68
Ibid.

36
3.2 Extended Learning Time
The implementation of extended learning time has been tested and examined in many
districts across the country and is often an integral part of the turnaround process. For the Fiscal
Year 2016, the Massachusetts Department of Education has appropriated $14,223,492 for ELT,
and ELT grants are available on a case by case basis to interested districts at a maximum rate of
$1,240 per pupil. Approximately 35% of turnaround grant funds are allocated for stipends
pertaining to extended learning time. The Massachusetts Department of Education dictates that
these grants should be used to:
1. “Provide resources that support the implementation of approved ELT implementation
plans in schools to:
2. Provide more instructional opportunities in mathematics, literacy, science, and other
core subjects to support student achievement; integrate enrichment opportunities into
student learning; and
3. Provide adults with increased opportunities to plan and participate in professional
development activities.”
A district must apply by June to receive ELT funding for the next fiscal year (i.e. apply in June,
2015 for a grant in FY 2016). 69
The effectiveness of ELT in improving student outcomes has been attested to many
times. For instance, in Getting Beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York
City, Harvard Economist Roland Fryer analyzes the positive benefits of extended learning time.
Examining New York City’s charter schools, Dr. Fryer reports that “high achieving charter
schools in our sample have a longer instructional year and day than other charter schools.”70
According to Fryer’s research, schools with more instructional time perform higher on
69
School Redesign. (2015, July 24). Retrieved October 8, 2015.
70
Dobbie, W., & Fryer, R. (2012). “Getting Beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York City,”
9.

37
standardized examinations than comparable schools with fewer classroom hours. The results of
this study present convincing evidence for the benefits in performance correlating with Extended
Learning Time.
However, simply extending the school day for the sake of adding extra time without
being intentional about the usage of that time may not produce better results. The Center for
Education Policy concludes that extended learning time can in fact be beneficial to the
improvement of turnaround schools if the time is focused productively, as articulated in their
report Expanded Learning Time A Summary of Findings from Case Studies in Four States. The
CEP argues that this time could be beneficially used for common planning or professional
development workshops.71
In their case studies, they found that the quality use of extra time is
far more important than the quantity of increased time. Similarly, researchers Dewalt and
Rodwell concluded that “increasing allocated time without varying the content presented to the
students or without varying the instructional delivery techniques did not increase student
achievement.”72
It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the Extended Time, if implemented,
must be effectively and strategically used to enhance the quality of instruction.
3.2.1 Allocating ELT
Turnaround school administrators must therefore consider carefully how to allot
additional time. In general, the districts that saw the most success tended to utilize the extended
time for professional development, common planning, and enrichment programs. These districts
found that they had more time to meet as a staff to create comprehensive lesson plans and
71
McMurrer, Frizzell, & Yoshioka. (2015). “Expanded Learning Time A Summary of Findings from Case Studies
in Four States,” 26.
72
Dewalt, M.W., and Rodwell, F.G. “Effects of Increased Learning Time in Remedial Math and Science.” ERS
SPECTRUM (1988): 33-36.

38
improve the overall academic direction of the school. The National Center on Time and Learning
has outlined the most effective strategies for Extended Learning Time in the study “Time Well
Spent: Eight Powerful Practices of Successful, Expanded Time Schools.” This study synthesizes
leading thought in the field and emphasizes the importance of not only maximizing the efficient
use of allotted time, but using the extended time to “provide a well-rounded education” and
“continuously strengthen instruction.” This study also outlines specific practices that school
administrators can follow to allocate extended learning time. These practices are summarized in
the paragraphs that followed:73
Firstly, the NCTL advocates “mak[ing] every minute count.” The classroom should be
kept on task at all times in order to maximize instructional time. Additionally, the time allotted
should be “[prioritized] according to focused learning goals.” These goals can be set by the
school administration based upon the desired mission of each individual school. In turn, these
goals should be monitored throughout the turnaround process in order to gauge progress. Schools
implementing ELT should also “individualize learning time and instruction based on student
needs.” With additional hours in the school day, there is time available for instruction on an
individual basis. Among students there is a wide range of learning differences, including
differences in the time needed to learn certain topics.74
This strategy should be employed in order
to personalize lessons or help sessions for students of varying abilities and needs.
In addition to classroom instruction, this report also suggests that schools should “use
time to help students thrive in school and beyond.” To achieve this goal, schools can “use time to
build a school culture of high expectations and mutual accountability.” One of the most
73
Chan and Kaplan. (2011) ”Time Well Spent: Eight Powerful Practices of Successful, Expanded-Time Schools,”
14.
74
Walberg, H.J., Niemiec, R.P., Frederick, W.C. (1994). Productive Curriculum Time. Peabody Journal of
Education, 69 (3), 88. doi: 10.1080/01619569409538779

39
important and productive benefits of extended learning time is that schools can “use time to
provide a well-rounded education.” Through time devoted to non-traditional enrichment
activities, schools can provide interesting and compelling instruction to support lessons taught in
the classroom. Additionally, enrichment time can be used for presentations and forums to
“prepare students for college and career.75
From a faculty and administrative standpoint, the additional time should primarily used to
“continuously strengthen instruction.” Extended learning time can best be used to broaden the
depth and breadth of a lesson to give students a deeper context of the material. Instead of simply
rushing through the material in a traditional manner, with the additional time in place, teachers
can supplement the contents of a given lesson plan with creative presentations and multimedia.
Lastly, in order to monitor the success of the previously outlined strategies, NCTL advocates that
administrators “use time to relentlessly assess, analyze, and respond to student data.”76
In the report “Productive Curriculum Time,” Herbert J. Walburg recommends using
extended instructional time to pursue individually adapted instruction, intensive remedial work
for struggling students, and the inclusion of differing levels and varieties of instruction to allow
for many types of learning style. In previous cases, schools that had shown improvement had
adjustments made in their daily schedules in order to increase time for specific academic work,
especially in the key areas of reading and mathematics, and to reduce time spent on transitions
and other non-subject based activities.77
3.2.2 Increasing Efficiency
75
Chan and Kaplan. (2011) ”Time Well Spent: Eight Powerful Practices of Successful, Expanded-Time Schools.”
76
Ibid.
77
Walberg, H.J., Niemiec, R.P., Frederick, W.C. (1994). Productive Curriculum Time. Peabody Journal of
Education, 69 (3). doi: 10.1080/01619569409538779

40
Increasing efficiency and behaviors that promote efficiency can also decrease the need
for expanded learning time or ensure that the increased time can be used for non-necessary
enrichment tasks. For instance, one study by Steven Nelson of the Office of Educational
Research and Improvement recommended that in addition to extending classroom time, schools
can significantly benefit by maximizing efficiency in a standard time frame. The study outlines
several practices to do this, including “begin[ning] and end[ing] lessons on time,” “reduc[ing]
transition time between tasks,” and “reduc[ing] non-instructional activities whenever possible,”
which would minimize lost time in the day.78
One key mechanism for increasing efficiency is improving student behavior. To increase
efficiency and productivity in the classroom, focused student behavior is paramount. Schools can
make the most of their instructional time when students are not being distracted by disruptive
behavior and teachers are teaching instead of dealing with disciplinary problems. The School
Climate section (Section 3.5) in this report discusses further strategies for promoting a positive
and safe school environment in which time can be used effectively.
3.2.3 Conclusions
The results of these research efforts indicate that a school district can increase classroom
efficiency and total learning time through 1) implementing a program of Extended Learning
Time and 2) minimizing lost classroom time by combating disruptive behavior. It is of critical
importance that administrators realize that implementing Extended Learning Time alone is not
proven to be a sufficient turnaround method. The additional time should be used for new student
enrichment and common planning to enhance the overall impact of classroom material. A district
78
Nelson, Steven. (1990).” Instructional time as a factor in increasing student achievement,” 3-5.

41
must also cultivate a professional, academic environment to minimize behavioral issues and
maximize efficiently used time in the classroom.
3.3 Standardized Testing Anxiety
A school’s relationship with testing, especially high-stakes tests like the MCAS, can be a
difficult one. On the one hand, such testing provides educators with valuable information which
can allow them to more effectively tailor their programs to the needs of their students and
understand where and how they are succeeding and which areas of competence need further
development. Uniformity of standards across schools is valuable, and standardized test results
can be more equitable than teacher-assigned grades.79
On the other hand, standardize testing
anxiety may discourage staff and students and lower morale, minimize the value of certain
subject areas and types of learning, and cause staff and students to narrow their focus to such
testing.
As one Massachusetts teacher said, the MCAS can feel like “a wrecking ball, poised to
demolish their school and destroy their students’ life chances.”80
And as special educator Ms.
Holbrook pointed out, for students who fall short of the prescribed standards of the MCAS,
“marked as failures at age 10, again at 14, and again at 16, their motivation will die, and they
will spiral downward.”81
Such perceptions of failure can even lead students to give up entirely
and drop out of school. Brown University professor John P. Papay’s statistical analysis of
Massachusetts test performance, published in 2011 is clear: where students show “essentially
79
Brennan, R., Kim, J., Wenz-Gross, M., & Siperstein, G. (2001). The relative equitability of high-stakes testing
versus teacher-assigned grades: An analysis of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS).
Harvard Educational Review, 71(2), 173-216.
80
Luna, Catherine, & Turner, Cara Livingstone. (2001). The Impact of the MCAS: Teachers Talk about High-Stakes
Testing. English Journal, 91(1), 79-87.
81
Holbrook, Pixie J. (2001). When Bad Things Happen to Good Children: A Special Educator's Views of MCAS.
Phi Delta Kappan, 82(10), 781-85.

42
equal proficiency near the cutoff” but receive different labels, earning a worse label worsens
subsequent educational outcomes, such as deciding not to go to college or dropping out.82
In the 2009 study 10th
grade MCAS test anxiety and how it relates to student
demographics, researcher McCaleb-Kahan showed a negative correlation between
socioeconomic status and test anxiety.83
Given the disproportionate percentages of low
socioeconomic status students in turnaround schools, these schools in particular must face this
testing anxiety head-on and assuage the fears of their students. One particularly interesting
finding from the interviews McCaleb-Kahan conducted is that the majority of low-
socioeconomic status students used the word “fail” to describe their MCAS fears, while high-
socioeconomic students talked about “not passing.” Even small linguistic differences like this
one are important and can shape students’ feelings about, and anxiety towards, the MCAS.
3.3.1 Strategies
There are many approaches turnaround schools can use to change the way students and
teachers feel about and approach such tests. However, there is no one-size-fits-all approach;
schools must consider what will work best for their situation. The examples described in this
section are not intended to act as a prescriptive formula, but rather to provide a variety of starting
points that educators can mine for ideas especially well-suited to the particularities of their
schools’ situation.
Researchers Hoffman and Nottis’ 2008 article Middle School Students’ Perception of
Effective Motivation and Preparation for High-Stakes Tests provides a strong overview of the
82
Papay, J. P. (2011). The unintended consequences of standardized test performance labeling on students'
educational investment decisions. Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
83
McCaleb-Kahan, P. (2009). 10th grade MCAS test anxiety and how it relates to student demographics. Available
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

43
effects of different factors on test anxiety.84
The researchers studied the 215 eighth-grade
students in a suburban middle school, of whom 80.9% were White, 9.1% were Asian, 7.6% were
African American, and 2.9% were Hispanic. Ten percent were eligible for free and reduced
lunch. In interviews with the students, researchers asked whether each of a list of factors
“influenced my performance” and students responded on a five-point Likert-type scale, ranging
from 1 = not at all to 5 = a great deal. The results are shown in Figure 4 below.
84
Hoffman, Lynn M., & Nottis, Katharyn E. K. (2008). Middle School Students' Perceptions of Effective
Motivation and Preparation Factors for High-Stakes Tests. NASSP Bulletin, 92(3), 209-223.

44
Figure 4 85
Notably, the two most factors most liked by the students were external motivators, and so
these, and others, will be discussed in more detail below. The effects of parent and teacher
expectations will also be examined in turn. The list itself should prove useful as a starting point
for further ideas.
85
Ibid.

45
3.3.1.1 External Motivators
Hoffman and Nottis’ work strongly suggests that external rewards are highly
motivational and improve students’ perceptions of testing. Examples of external motivators
found to be highly popular among the students of the eighth-grade students in their study
included a grade-level picnic following the testing period and the dispersal of edible treats by
teachers during lengthy testing sessions. One interviewed student told researchers that “knowing
that we had a great picnic to look forward to made me want to do my best. It provided something
special for our hard work and I knew that if I did not work hard, I did not deserve the picnic.”
Similarly, Joshua Emmett’s 2013 study examined the introduction of extrinsic motivation
to influence students’ attitudes and behavior towards high-stakes tests. This study was conducted
in a large urban high school of 2000 students, which had a majority of Latino students and where
around 70% of students qualified for the Free and Reduced Lunch Program.86
In response to a
school history of poor performance on the state exams, the school in his study introduced a
recognition system with a wide array of rewards, ranging from t-shirts and prizes to express
lunch passes, special dance parties, recognition, and “hall-of-fame” posters – all to promote
student achievement on state assessments. School leaders made sure to design the program so as
to encourage students at different levels of achievement, with provisions for both strong absolute
achievement and improvement in performance bands. The school’s efforts did seem to shift the
attitudes and behaviors of its students. The school’s increases in achievement outpaced the
increases of its district, closing much of the gap that had seen it underperform; the number of
students scoring proficient or advanced on two or more exams rose 45.5% between 2009 and
2011, from 24.4% to 35.5%. It outperformed its district as a whole, as the district’s scores rose
86
Emmett, J. (2013) Using Extrinsic Motivation to Influence Student Attitude and Behavior Toward State
Assessments at an Urban High School. NASSP Bulletin, 97(3), 197-217.

46
only 19.9%, from 33.6% to 40.3%. Students who were interviewed praised the program, saying
“it makes you try more than you normally would,” that it helped them “feel successful,” and that
“it motivates [them] more because of the award and recognition for doing something well.”
Given the strong evidence in favor of using of external motivators, educators in turnarounds
should consider allocating minor grant funding to purchasing small rewards, and should be
creative in exploring these methods.
3.3.1.2 Parent Expectations
Hoffman and Nottis reported that students appreciated the support and encouragement of
their parents, were grateful that their parents made sure they had a full night’s rest and a good
breakfast on testing days, and were motivated to do their best and make their parents proud.87
Additionally, McCaleb-Kahan found that very few students said that their parents’ references to
the MCAS made them more nervous; the majority said that their parents rarely discussed the test,
and, when it was brought up, their comments were supportive and received well.88
Parents are an
important resource in supporting students through difficult testing, and turnaround schools can
encourage parents to support their children by providing information about the test, the test dates,
and practical ways they can assist their child through the process. For other strategies promoting
parent engagement, see the Parental Involvement section (Section 4.1) of this paper.
3.3.1.3 Teacher Expectations
87
Hoffman, Lynn M., & Nottis, Katharyn E. K. (2008). Middle School Students' Perceptions of Effective
Motivation and Preparation Factors for High-Stakes Tests. NASSP Bulletin, 92(3), 209-223.
88
McCaleb-Kahan, P. (2009). 10th grade MCAS test anxiety and how it relates to student demographics. Available
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

47
Teacher expectations are a trickier area to get right. The middle-school students studied
by Hoffman and Nottis responded well to the confidence and enthusiasm of their teachers.89
In
particular, they expressed their gratitude for teachers’ consideration during testing periods: they
were given no homework and had an adjusted workload to reduce their fatigue and allow them to
concentrate their efforts on the test.
On the other hand, high teacher expectations can also increase student stress. In
McCaleb-Kahan’s study, more than half of the students interviewed stated that their teachers’
comments about the MCAS increased their feelings of anxiety.90
One student complained that
teachers “say that they expect us to excellent on it. That kind of talk just makes me more
nervous.” Another student commented, “My teachers talk about it a lot. They say how important
it is to pass. They scare you.” He also found that one of the factors that increased test anxiety
was a fear of humiliation over their results - said one student, “I worry because I know this test is
gonna make me look stupid.” The students who felt this pressure were not worried about what
their peers would think, but concerned about what their parents and teachers would think of
them: for instance, another student reported that they would “be really ashamed” should they do
badly, because “my teachers and my family expect me to do better all the time.” 91
Teachers must
carefully consider the effects of the way they talk about the test to their students, and the manner
in which they convey their expectations about performance.
3.3.1.4 Student Efficacy
89
Hoffman, Lynn M., & Nottis, Katharyn E. K. (2008). Middle School Students' Perceptions of Effective
Motivation and Preparation Factors for High-Stakes Tests. NASSP Bulletin, 92(3), 209-223.
90
McCaleb-Kahan, P. (2009). 10th grade MCAS test anxiety and how it relates to student demographics. Available
from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
91
Ibid.

48
In addition to the effects of teachers and parents’ expectations, McCaleb-Kahan’s work
lists other factors that affect student feelings of anxiety about the test. Feeling uncertainty about
MCAS content raised students’ anxiety, so schools should keep this in mind when planning their
test preparation strategies. A sense of academic efficacy helped to reduce test anxiety. Students
who felt that their performance was within their control were less worried about the test, as one
student reported, “I felt confident going into it. Our teachers have worked us hard… I’m
ready.”92
This feeling of preparedness proved key for many and is something schools should
focus on cultivating.
Schools in turnaround should therefore carefully consider their school-wide approach to
the MCAS and have a clear strategy of how they can better encourage and prepare their students
to rise to the challenge of the test. Departments should meet to create a shared approach to test
preparation in their curriculum and make plans for how they will both motivate and allay the
fears of their students.
3.3.2 Conclusions
In this section, we have outlined four major strategies that turnaround schools should
consider pursuing in order to minimize negative responses to tests among their students.
Turnaround schools should carefully consider the specifics of their situation in deciding whether
external motivators, encouraging positive parent feedback, instructing teachers to be intentional
and sensitive in setting expectations, and increasing students’ sense of efficacy would be useful
strategies to pursue in their schools. Finally, teachers and school leaders should not lose sight of
92
Ibid.

49
the strengths of the MCAS, especially the opportunity to identify struggling students early so as
to better meet their learning needs.
3.4 Student Voice
The turnaround model remains very much in its infancy, which can make it vulnerable to
bandwagon effect. Successful turnaround schools are analyzed and their techniques copied with
the intent to replicate their results in other schools. This creates a lack of interest in exploring
new techniques that may not have been piloted in the first generation of successful schools.
Because of this, the focus of most research is on strong leadership by incoming school principals,
a focus shaped both by the success of these first schools and by the ethos of the turnaround
model itself, which places great importance on the role of the principal in leading the turnaround
process. Unfortunately, this strong emphasis on principals has delayed serious discussion about
the role of the students themselves in the turnaround process.
In a 2011 article, professional development directors Easton and Soguero lamented,
“Adults work hard to craft schools they think will be the best possible environments for teaching
and learning, but they seldom consult the consumers of their products and processes, the students
themselves.”93
As researchers Kirshner and Pozzoboni argued in 2011 in the Teachers College
Record, adolescents are often developmentally ready to participate in leadership roles under
conditions of support. Statistically, many youth in underperforming schools already fill mature,
adult-like roles in their families: caring for siblings, contributing financially through a part-time
93
Easton, Lois Brown, & Soguero, Michael. (2011). Challenging Assumptions: Helping Struggling Students
Succeed. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(5), 27-33.

50
job, or translating for their parents.94
Kirshner and Pozzoboni argue that because they are experts
in their own worlds, students have knowledge and insights that can be a valuable resource for
school reform decision making.
As the primary stakeholders in their education, students therefore ought to be given a
voice about the turnaround of their school. At the middle school and high school level, schools
should provide opportunities for these young people to be involved in leadership roles. While we
hardly advocate turning over leadership of the entire school to students, including students in the
turnaround process can increase the school’s sensitivity to issues that students are uniquely well-
placed to comment on. Such issues include school environment, encouraging student buy-in to
the turnaround, and giving students a heightened sense of efficacy and responsibility. In this
section of the report, we will begin by highlighting several of the benefits conferred upon schools
when they consult student voice and then discuss specific models for including students in
leadership roles in the turnaround process.
3.4.1 Benefits
Emphasizing student leadership benefits both schools and students. Most importantly,
providing opportunities for student leadership provides tangible benefits to turnaround schools,
in that it provides schools with feedback and encourages student buy-in to the turnaround
process. As the actual members of the school, the perspective and experiences of students
qualifies them uniquely to provide insight into the running of the school, and the quality of these
insights alone is reason enough to incorporate student voice. Surveys of the opinion of the
student body are therefore a powerful way of tracking the progress of the turnaround and the
94
Kirshner, B., & Pozzoboni, K. (2011). Student Interpretations of a School Closure: Implications for Student Voice
in Equity-Based School Reform. Teachers College Record, 113(8), 1633-1637.

51
student reaction of changes being made. They provide a critical perspective on issues like
playground behavior, student mental health, bullying, and consistency across different teachers,
and decision-makers should absolutely utilize these insights. Additionally, when students
participate in school decision-making, they are more likely to support and understand the
decisions their administrators make. The student body is more likely to respect decisions made
by the school when they know that fellow students helped make that decision. Given the often
complicated and turbulent nature of the turnaround process, acquiring student support can be a
critical part of the success of such reforms.95
Additionally, students can benefit from the opportunity to take part in leadership within
their school as well. Research has shown that impoverished schools tend to lack opportunities for
student leadership. Such a lack leads to these schools’ “failing to adequately promote the skills
and sense of political efficacy that underserved youth would need as adults to be civically active
against the social inequities that affect them so directly,” according to Stanford researchers
McFarland and Starmanns.96
Students who are empowered to be active participants in their
school often become civically engaged adults. Students who are given the opportunity to voice
their opinion are made to feel that their opinion matters, and their ideas are valued. When given
leadership opportunities, students can develop important leadership skills, learn from the staff
they work with and learn to work in a team, challenge assumptions, and quite likely improve this
developing turnaround process.
3.4.2 Theoretical Models
95
Kirshner, B., & Pozzoboni, K. (2011). Student Interpretations of a School Closure: Implications for Student
Voice in Equity-Based School Reform. Teachers College Record, 113(8), 1633-1637.
96
McFarland, D., & Starmanns, C. (2009). Inside Student Government: The Variable Quality of High School
Student Councils. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 27-54.

52
In this section, we provide a variety of models for accessing student voice and
encouraging student leadership in turnarounds. Sometimes, schools may want to access the
opinions of their entire student body. For many topics, having students fill out anonymous
submissions allows students to feel safe in portraying their true opinions. School leaders who are
comfortable using such data should include some rating-scale type questions to get a snapshot of
student feeling, which they can use to highlight problem areas or track issues over time. Besides
gathering school-wide feedback, focus groups can be a valuable means of accessing more
qualitative student opinion. Even the very act of sitting down with school leaders and being truly
listened to can be powerful for students. While both of these methods are useful, they are limited
to the topics the school solicits feedback about. Unsolicited ideas and feedback should also be
encouraged, and there should be clear and well-defined channels for their expression. Schools
should consider implementing a suggestion drop-box for student ideas or having a designated
staff member and email address that students can communicate with about concerns, complaints,
suggestions, or ideas. This way, individual students or groups can make their voices heard,
without waiting to be asked for their thoughts by a formal survey.
When it comes to the practicalities of encouraging student voice in the classroom, British
researchers Rudduck and Fielding emphasize the importance of “teacher authenticity.”97
This
authenticity requires teachers to display genuine interest in students’ ideas, discuss them, and
then, where appropriate, take real action based on their suggestions. Students are astute; they
notice when teachers are genuinely listening to them and care about what they are saying, and
this authenticity encourages them to express their opinions about the school and their learning
more. On this subject, Ruddick and Fielding also note that teachers may feel that they cannot
97
Rudduck, J., & Fielding, M. (2006). Student voice and the perils of popularity. Educational Review, 58(2), 219-
231.