What We Must Do for Students Placed at Risk.
Saved in:
| Title: | What We Must Do for Students Placed at Risk. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Rossi, Robert J., Stringfield, Samuel C. |
| Source: | Phi Delta Kappan. Sep 1995 77(1):73-76. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 4 |
| Publication Date: | 1995 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Evaluative Information Analyses Journal Articles |
| Descriptors: | Case Studies, Child Neglect, Community, Democratic Values, Educational Change, Elementary Secondary Education, Futures (of Society), High Risk Students, Poverty, Role of Education, Student Welfare |
| ISSN: | 0031-7217 |
| Abstract: | Reviews 30 years of research, concentrating on ongoing reform initiatives and 18 programs designated as effective with at-risk students. Identifies broad, overarching conditions essential for transporting isolated successes to all schools serving at-risk students. Outlines key characteristics of two promising models: community in schools and schools as high-reliability organizations. (15 references) (MLH) |
| Entry Date: | 1996 |
| Accession Number: | EJ511701 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN9510086594;PDK01SEP.95;1995Oct25.16:26;v2.3</anid> <title id="AN9510086594-1">WHAT WE MUST DO FOR STUDENTS PLACED AT RISK </title> <p>From their study for the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Messrs. Rossi and Stringfield identify broad, overarching conditions that must be met in transporting isolated successes to the entire population of schools serving at-risk students. </p> <p>By the year 2020, the majority of students in America's public schools will be living in circumstances traditionally regarded as placing them at risk of educational failure.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>] Many will be poorly housed, undernourished, subject to the effects of others' abuse of drugs, and provided with few positive adult role models. A greater number of young people will be neglected or abused by those adults who enter their lives and- because of misunderstandings, insufficient resources, or a lack of regard for individual differences and capabilities -- treated harshly by the very institutions that ostensibly were created to help them.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>] </p> <p>There are at least three rationales for improving our schools' readiness to meet the projected educational challenges posed by these demographic trends. The first is tied up with the transmission of societal values. Throughout our history, people have supported the view that all citizens must be taught to read the great religious, philosophical, historical, and political works of their heritage. Early labor union organizers, for example, frequently argued that workers needed Sundays off from work so that they could go to "Sunday schools" and learn to read the Bible. Without reading and reasoning skills, the knowledge and mores we have established as a society will be endangered, and the opportunities to extend these systems of belief will be cut short. </p> <p>A second rationale for improving the schooling experiences of at-risk students is linked to our democratic way of life. How can a democracy survive if a significant percentage of its citizens cannot read and place in perspective the public debates of the times? A citizenry needs information, but it must also be able to interpret this information and make thoughtful judgments. A democracy cannot survive if its citizens lack the skills to seek common ground through deliberation and consensus building. </p> <p>The third rationale for better serving at-risk students is provided by the inevitable consequences of moving into a postmodern, high-tech, global economy. Over the last 20 years, the number of highly paid low-skill jobs in the U.S. has greatly diminished because of the powerful combination of automated production processes at home and access to very low-wage factories located in developing nations. As a result, between 1973 and 1992 the average annual income of young male high school dropouts in the U.S. fell by an alarming 49%.[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>] When young people do not succeed in school, the economic consequences to individuals and to the country are staggering. </p> <p>These three rationales converge on one central thesis. As a nation, we need to find ways to improve the quality of education for all citizens, particularly those young people who are most at risk of failure. </p> <p>In a study for the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, we reviewed the research from the past 30 years and examined ongoing experiences of reform initiatives.[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>] We conducted case studies at 18 schools that had previously been designated as effective in working with at-risk students.[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref5">5</reflink>] </p> <p>We observed in classrooms, in halls, and on playgrounds; interviewed school and central office administrators and program developers; and conducted focus groups with teachers, students, and parents. Frequently, we left sites feeling very good about the future -- the programs in place were working well. However, this century has seen many widely celebrated "lighthouse" schools and exemplary school improvement programs,[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref6">6</reflink>] few of which have resulted in any lasting improvements in the education of large numbers of disadvantaged young people. We knew from the start that, for our study to be of use, more than simple descriptions of successes were going to be needed. What we have aimed to do is identify broad, overarching conditions that must be met in transporting isolated successes to the entire population of schools serving at-risk students. These conditions have been the focus of our work, and we have classified them into two categories: community in schools and schools as high-reliability organizations. </p> <hd id="AN9510086594-2"> Community in Schools </hd> <p>"Community" has to do with the deep-structure fabric of interpersonal relations.[<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref7">7</reflink>] Soundly woven, this fabric permits a shared frame of reference and supports mutual expectations. </p> <p>The relations among adults in schools provide models of behavior for students. The ways in which teachers, administrators, and classified staff persons relate to students also define the conditions within which the teaching and learning of specific subject matters take place. In addition, these relations determine a school's readiness to undertake and sustain efforts to achieve shared goals (e.g., making the campus a safe haven or raising reading achievement scores), and they define a school's image in its neighborhood -- for parents, nonparent residents, local businesspeople and shopkeepers, and community-based service organizations. The quality of these relations is critical to all facets of school operation, yet it is typically taken for granted. Just as typically, in our experience, the quality of these relations is much lower than it must be if schools are to be productive. </p> <p>In previous studies and in this one, we noted several attributes of interpersonal relations in schools that were associated with effective programs or periods of pro-gram effectiveness. Students felt cared about and respected, teachers shared a vision and a sense of purpose, teachers and students maintained free and open communication, and all parties shared a deep sense of trust. Visits to the effective schools and to other sites confirmed that the weakening or absence of these attributes often accompanies program failure. Building on studies of community in work and school settings,[<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref8">8</reflink>] we have identified 10 elements that characterize adult, student, and adult/student relations in schools that are communities: </p> <ulist> <item> shared vision; </item> <item> shared sense of purpose; </item> <item> shared values; </item> <item> incorporation of diversity; </item> <item> communication; </item> <item> participation; </item> <item> caring; </item> <item> trust; </item> <item> teamwork; and </item> <item> respect and recognition. </item> </ulist> <p>Schools that consciously work at strengthening these elements are, in our view. building the necessary foundation for excellence. </p> <p>For schools serving many poor students, community building presents special challenges. Personal, monetary, and material resources in these schools are likely to be stretched thin, so that opportunities for investment in community building are often severely limited. In addition, accommodating the ethnic, cultural. and socio-economic diversity that is typical of these settings requires special talent and dedication. The sites we studied offered distinctive examples of achievement in terms of the dimensions listed above. </p> <p>Shared vision, shared purpose, and shared values were most often the result of efforts to define common goals for education and for working with students. In some cases, forward-looking principals who were willing to work persistently (or staff members themselves) succeeded in changing staff attitudes and building emotional and practical supports among the staff for student-related outcomes. In one case in which the "founding" principal had left, staff members continued to shape their vision for the site in terms of shared values originating in their commitments to their students and to one another. </p> <p>Strong principals are often those who have succeeded in achieving shared vision and purpose by listening to and working with their staffs, students, and parents to reach consensus. Focusing on a particular program or problem has also served to bring the various parties together. In one site, an emphasis on cooperative learning gradually spread to the entire faculty and staff, transforming the adults at the school into a family. At another site, the infusion of a private school curriculum into all grades of a public school provided the neighborhood with new pride and the staff with a shared context for discussions of learning objectives and student progress. At an alternative school site that was created by eight school districts in a rural area to address the needs of at-risk students, the various principals and the staff members took on the challenge and fashioned a unified approach together with their students. </p> <p>Incorporation of diversity was a hallmark of all the successful sites we visited. Teachers and administrators actively sought out the distinctive talents of their students, and they had come to see great value in a diversity of linguistic abilities. In one site, problem-solving discussions among students could be heard in Vietnamese and Spanish; at another, aides "talked like the students talk" on the playground so as to facilitate conversation and a sense of closeness. Cultural celebrations were almost the norm in these sites, and the most successful schools had developed strong outreach efforts to involve area families and residents in their programs. </p> <p>Communication and participation are closely related, and open-door policies and open forums for discussion at staff meetings were featured ingredients at the most successful schools we studied. New teachers quickly found mentors and endless opportunities to learn about the school setting and instructional approach. Staff teams, often with parent participants, recommended new strategies or modifications in current practices. Staff development programs strengthened capabilities for taking part in leadership activities at the sites, At one school, for example, the principal selected different teachers to attend different workshops and to report on them, thus building their knowledge and self-confidence. Students at these sites were also regarded as full participants in site activities, and every effort was made to solicit their views on how well programs were working and what could be done to improve them. At one site, no student's problem was "off the table," and individual and group discussions with students were often held in informal settings to encourage the active interchange of comments and ideas. </p> <p>Caring, trust, and teamwork are in some ways the results of effective communication and active participation by all parties at the school site. Many of the most impressive sites we studied had created family networks within and across grades or classes. Staff members had worked hard to engender feelings of trust in their students and colleagues. At one site, for example, teachers brought their classes together regularly and had organized a "buddy system" among older and younger students on the campus. At another site, teachers, vocational specialists, and personnel from student job sites had formed teams to bolster students' self-confidence and increase opportunities for learning. At a third, school staff members regularly greeted every student every morning --with a handshake, a hug, and a review of the previous day's progress or that day's plans. Among staff members themselves, caring, trust, and teamwork had often arisen as a result of sharing the challenges posed by new programs, students with special needs, or neighborhood or district problems. </p> <p>Respect and recognition were much in evidence in the effective educational programs for at-risk students that we visited. Even when new programs are being implemented, a lack of respect for students, as indicated by harassment and severe punishments, can kill any chance of positive results. Lack of mutual respect and recognition among staff members also weakens the social fabric of the school and lowers morale. When positive performance is affirmed, both teachers and students strive to do their best. At one model site, a principal who was relatively new to the campus chose to demonstrate his respect for the staff and the students by letting them orient him to their successful implementation of Robert Slavin's Success for All program.[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref9">9</reflink>] </p> <hd id="AN9510086594-3"> Schools as High-Reliability Organizations </hd> <p>A sense of community in schools, as modeled in varying degrees by the 18 sites visited in our study, provides the necessary foundation for positive change at the building level. However, we also recognized that the introduction and sustenance of positive change requires district-and state-level supports that are consistent with campus priorities and constant in their emphasis. In developing a framework for examining these supports, we looked at organizations that are expected to meet the daunting criterion of virtually 100% failure-free operation. </p> <p>Air traffic control towers and regional electric power grids are two examples of High-Reliability Organizations (HROs) described by Todd LaPorte and Paula Consolini.[<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref10">10</reflink>] Karlene Roberts also described characteristics of HROs in diverse sellings,[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref11">11</reflink>] and one of the authors of this article examined the probable educational implications of an "HRO response" to the increasing demands that the education system provide high-quality instructional services to all students. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref12">12</reflink>] </p> <p>In our study of effective programs, we examined each successful case for evidence that curricular and instructional decisions were being made and supported in ways that were consistent with the evolved characteristics of organizations required to operate at high reliability. We found much support for the HRO construct, and, not surprisingly, for its dependence on an established network of high-quality relations (i.e., community) among all stake-holders on campus. While HRO characteristics are dynamic, and any presentation of them risks conveying an artificially static picture, we believe that the following characterizations and examples are illuminating. </p> <p>1. The central goals of HROs are clear and widely shared. On board a nuclear aircraft carrier, the primary mission is to launch and land military aircraft. For a water company, it is to provide clean, drinkable water to all people being served. The principal at one of the sites we studied regularly described the school's goal as preparing young people to be highly successful in the world of commerce. The core task of another site was to ensure that all students would be reading at or above grade level by the end of third grade. At a third site, the core task was to provide a high-quality, demanding educational program within an organization that gave each student the maximum opportunity to pass each grade successfully and graduate. </p> <ulist> <item>2. All staff members in HROs share a belief that success is critical and that failure to achieve core tasks would be absolutely disastrous. We found similar drives permeating the most successful schools and programs in our study. Parents, teachers, and administrators worked on the various reforms as though academic and pro-social success were critical. At some of our less successful sites, failures were sometimes anticipated, and staff members typically associated them with failings of the students or their home situations. </item> <item>3. HROs stress intensive recruitment and ongoing training. To meet the criterion of zero catastrophic errors, organizations must be able to rely on the staff's professional decision making. Like high-reliability noneducational organizations, the exemplary sites we visited had two universal features: they recruited with unusual energy and care, and they participated in unusual levels of ongoing staff development. As part of its yearly routine, the leadership team at one of the sites we studied participated in an average of two weeks per year of intensive training, one week of which was shared with the entire school staff. The staff members of another site had arranged an elaborate series of staff development exercises each year, some conducted by program developers, some by local university faculty, and the remainder planned and led by "senior" faculty members at the site. </item> <item>4. HROs build an interdependence among staff members. Especially during times of peak workloads, staff members are able to assume a close interdependence of operations- usually rooted in the strong sense of community that is established during nonpeak times. For example, traditional "norms of autonomy" had been broken down within the ninth-grade team at a site belonging to the Coalition of Essential Schools. We have seen this sort of interdependence at sites that included charter schools, school-within-a-school arrangements, and alternative schools. </item> <item>5. HROs extend formal, logical decision analysis, evolved into standard operating procedures, as far as extant knowledge allows. This is not at all a celebration of bureaucracy for its own sake. Rather, it is an effort to standardize best proven practice in some areas so as to focus human attention on performing nonstandard tasks well. The curricular frameworks that were used to guide mathematics instruction at two California sites in our study declared that some things had to be universal. Such decisions helped shape the next level of decisions --which were still considerable -- that had to be made by the professional staff. It is important to note that the frameworks provided a level of assurance to each teacher that each year's incoming students would share a common body of knowledge. Such assurance allows a teacher to cover additional material more rapidly or in greater depth. We have found that similar standard curricular and organizational supports can be supplied by well-known national programs, such as Core Knowledge[<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref13">13</reflink>] and Success for All.[<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref14">14</reflink>] </item> <item>6. HROs prize vigilance against lapses and flexibility toward rules. Since lapses cannot always be avoided, HROs must prevent them from cascading into larger problems. A child who has not learned to read by third grade, for example, creates a series of complex problems involving his ability to use text and his self-concept. He often generates severe instruction/management problems for upper-grade teachers. What might have been a small problem if treated early in school can become a series of major problems. Some of our sites had adopted instructional programs such as Reading Recovery[<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref15">15</reflink>] and thus were especially vigilant when it came to early student failures. In other sites, interdisciplinary teams that met on a frequent basis often worked to detect students' problems early, to seek solutions, and to support each student until he or she was again able to handle current assignments. </item> <item>7. HROs are invariably valued by their supervising organizations. This valuing typically results from the emphasis on long-term reliability over short-term "efficiencies." The program developers with whom we spoke quickly acknowledged that there were whole districts in which their programs could not prosper. Success does not happen in isolation. Rather, successful schools find support from a community of adults working within the school, from the surrounding community, from district administrators, from state-level decision makers, and from the program developers themselves. The most successful sites we visited had strong, ongoing connections to program developers. </item> </ulist> <p>Our nation faces very serious challenges in serving its at-risk students. We have made progress in isolated areas, but, to sustain this isolated progress and extend it to much larger numbers of schools, we must provide a more solid research base for the many suspected connections between instructional processes and student outcomes and for the level of effectiveness of various "promising programs" in diverse contexts. We must evolve more readily available and useful information on contextually effective program options and provide realistic sets of requirements for program implementation. Finally, we must motivate a national drive toward systemic supports for community and for high-reliability operations in schools serving at-risk students. </p> <p>1. Gary Natriello, Edward L. McDill, and Aaron M. Pallas, Schooling Disadvantaged Children: Racing Against Catastrophe (New York: Teachers College Press, 1990). </p> <ulist> <item>2. Alesia F. Montgomery and Robert J. Rossi, "Becoming at Risk of Failure in America's Schools," in Robert J. Rossi, ed., Schools and Students at Risk: Context and Framework for Positive Change (New York: Teachers College Press, 1994). </item> <item>3. Samuel C. Stringfield, "Attempts to Enhance Students' Learning: A Search for Valid Programs and Highly Reliable Implementation Techniques," School Effectiveness and School Improvement, vol. 6, 1995, pp. 67-96. </item> <item>4. Rossi, op. cit.; and Robert J. Rossi and Samuel C. String field, Educational Reforms and Students at Risk: Final Research Report, vols. I-III (Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, forthcoming). </item> <item>5. Samuel C. Stringfield et al., Urban and Suburban/Rural Special Strategies for Educating Disadvantaged Children: First Year Report (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1994); and Robert J. Rossi, Effective Strategies for Keeping Students in School: Evaluation of Projects Funded by the School Dropout Demonstration Assistance Program (Washington, D.C.: Office of Policy and Planning, U.S. Department of Education, forthcoming). We are grateful to the following schools that have participated both in our previous national evaluations and in the current studies of reforms for at-risk students: Aynesworth Elementary School, Fresno; Oceana High School, Pacifica, Calif.; Ortega Elementary School, San Francisco: St. Lawrence Academy, Santa Clara, Calif.; Lincoln-Bassett Elementary School, New Haven: Lincoln High School, Des Moines; Goldblatt Elementary School, Chicago; Barclay Elementary School, Baltimore; Carter G. Woodson Elementary School, Baltimore; Oakhurst Elementary School, Charlotte; Bellefonte (Pa.) High School; Francis Scott Key Elementary School, Philadelphia; Furness High School, Philadelphia; Kensington High School, Philadelphia; Cooperative Alternative Program, Coleman, Tex.; Hawthorne Elementary School, San Antonio; Coronado Village Elementary School, Universal City, Tex.; and Cherry Hills Elementary School, Provo. </item> <item>6. Eugene Randolf Smith and Ralph W. Tyler, Adventures in American Education. Vol. III: Appraising and Recording Student Progress (New York: Harper, 1942); for a review, see Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught, 2nd ed. (New York: Teachers College Press, 1993). </item> <item>7. John W. Gardner, Building Community (Washington, D.C.: Independent Sector, 1991). </item> <item>8. See, for example, Robert J. Rossi and Mark A. Royal, Measuring Workplace Community: Final Report to the W. K. Kellogg Foundation (Palo Alto, Calif.: American Institutes for Research, 1994). </item> <item>9. Robert Slavin et al., Success for All: A Relentless Approach to Prevention and Early Intervention in Elementary Schools (Arlington, Va.: Education Research Service, 1992). </item> <item>10. Todd LaPorte and Paula Consolini, "Working in Practice but Not in Theory: Theoretical Challenges of 'High-Reliability Organizations,'" Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, vol. 1,1991, pp. 19-48. </item> <item>11. Karlene Roberts, "Some Characteristics of High Reliability Organizations," Organizational Science, vol. 1, 1990, pp. 1-17; and idem, New Challenges to Understanding Organizations (New York: Macmillan, 1993). </item> <item>12. Stringfield et al., op. cit.; and Stringfield, op. cit. </item> <item>13. Core Knowledge Sequence (Charlottesville, Va.: Core Knowledge Foundation, 1995). </item> <item>14. Nancy A. Madden et al., "Success for All: Longitudinal Effects of a Restructuring Program for Inner-City Elementary Schools," American Educational Research Journal, vol. 30, 1993, pp. 123-48. </item> <item>15. Gay Su Pinnell, "Reading Recovery: Helping At-Risk Children Learn to Read," Elementary School Journal, vol. 90, 1989, pp. 161-82. </item> </ulist> <p>CARTOON: "Wait until the grant committee sees this!" </p> <aug> <p>By ROBERT J. ROSSI AND SAMUEL C. STRINGFIELD </p> <p></p> <p>ROBERT J. ROSSI is a principal research scientist and director of the Youth and Community Group at the American Institutes for Research, Palo Alto, Calif. SAMUEL C. STRING-FIELD is a principal research scientist in the Center for Social Organization of Schools, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. </p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib1" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib2" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib3" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib4" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib5" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib6" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib7" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib8" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib9" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref15"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ511701 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Report PubTypeId: report PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: What We Must Do for Students Placed at Risk. – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rossi%2C+Robert+J%2E%22">Rossi, Robert J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stringfield%2C+Samuel+C%2E%22">Stringfield, Samuel C.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Phi+Delta+Kappan%22"><i>Phi Delta Kappan</i></searchLink>. Sep 1995 77(1):73-76. – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 4 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 1995 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Reports - Evaluative<br />Information Analyses<br />Journal Articles – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Case+Studies%22">Case Studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Neglect%22">Child Neglect</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Community%22">Community</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Democratic+Values%22">Democratic Values</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Change%22">Educational Change</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Futures+%28of+Society%29%22">Futures (of Society)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22High+Risk+Students%22">High Risk Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Poverty%22">Poverty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Role+of+Education%22">Role of Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Welfare%22">Student Welfare</searchLink> – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0031-7217 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Reviews 30 years of research, concentrating on ongoing reform initiatives and 18 programs designated as effective with at-risk students. Identifies broad, overarching conditions essential for transporting isolated successes to all schools serving at-risk students. Outlines key characteristics of two promising models: community in schools and schools as high-reliability organizations. (15 references) (MLH) – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 1996 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ511701 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ511701 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 4 StartPage: 73 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Case Studies Type: general – SubjectFull: Child Neglect Type: general – SubjectFull: Community Type: general – SubjectFull: Democratic Values Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Change Type: general – SubjectFull: Elementary Secondary Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Futures (of Society) Type: general – SubjectFull: High Risk Students Type: general – SubjectFull: Poverty Type: general – SubjectFull: Role of Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Student Welfare Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: What We Must Do for Students Placed at Risk. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Rossi, Robert J. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Stringfield, Samuel C. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 1995 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0031-7217 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 77 – Type: issue Value: 1 Titles: – TitleFull: Phi Delta Kappan Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
