The Coalition of Essential Schools and Rural Educational Reform

The Coalition of Essential Schools (CES) has existed for thirty years and includes hundreds of public schools that are diverse in size, population, and programmatic emphasis. A qualitative grounded theory approach is utilized to describe how three rural (non-urban/suburban) high schools operationalize CES Common Principles. This research documents that the CES reform network may be both a viable and underutilized reform model for rural school districts to assist them in achieving educational excellence. Empirical data came from school site visits, interviews and school documents. Grounded theory identifies four working hypothesis that explain how these schools, as CES members, aim to be true to the Coalition’s principles. The working hypotheses are: (1) Educational justice, democracy, and citizenship, (2) The educational value of interpersonal relationships between teachers and students, (3) Pedagogical and curricular organization to enhance student engagement and learning, and (4) Pathways to adulthood via the world.

OC Teachers Take Their Learning to Other Schools

In 1977, when the OC program was brand-new, and for a number of years thereafter, we shared the excitement and the work, both as parents and as teachers. We are now living in different states, working in very different kinds of schools. Judy is a high school principal in a large public high school in Washington State. Mimi is a fourth-grade teacher in an independent school in South Carolina that is associated with a major school-restructuring initiative (the Coalition of Essential Schools). In our efforts to contribute to reform in our classrooms and schools, we find that we are returning, about 20 years later, to the basic philosophy that directed our OC experience. In many ways, what we learned in the OC, both in terms of instructional practices and in terms of change processes, is giving us the confidence we need to proceed in our new settings. Personal experiences and the general principles of the OC—along with increasingly compelling research about how children learn that questions the way schools are traditionally organized and how we think about curriculum and instruction—have helped us organize and promote new programs on both sides of the country. The changes we are working on are not simple ones. We are looking at ways to integrate across disciplines, combining English, physics, and history into an integrated block. Instead of chopping school days into isolated blocks of time, we are exploring ways of lengthening these blocks of time and trying more flexible schedules. We are looking at designing work for children that covers fewer things in greater depth, through more focused inquiry. Believing that children will learn better if they can make connections, we seek ways to challenge students not just to memorize material but to apply it as well. We are working to make it possible for individual students to carry out research and to present their work before a critical audience. These changes have the potential to challenge the sacrosanct purpose of most schools: to prepare students for the next level and to get them into colleges.