Reform Efforts Must Be Comprehensive

Rutherford and Ahlgren (1990) discuss the necessity of all-inclusive reform:

"Piecemeal reform measures beget piecemeal effects, if any. At the school district level, reform efforts should be inclusive: all grades, all subject domains, all streams. It is less demanding to concentrate on, say, improving third-grade reading, junior high school social studies and biology for vocational students. But such unrelated changes are not likely to add up to curricula that are any more integrated, coherent, and effective than the fragmented, overburdened ones that now exist. Without a more sweeping approach, change will be constrained by having to fit within the boundaries of class periods, school subjects, sequences, and tracks that themselves may be a large part of the problem.

Nationwide, reform needs to be comprehensive in the sense of addressing all aspects of the system. Reform in science education depends on changing existing curricula from kindergarten through high school. But to make new curricula work, changes must also occur in the preparation of teachers, the content of textbooks and other learning materials, the use of technologies, the nature of testing, and the organization of schools. Furthermore, the changes need to be compatible, lest they cancel each other out.

Comprehensive reform does not imply going off in all directions at once. Rather, it demands that some steps occur before others, that some problems take precedence, and that resources be deployed strategically. Careful systemwide planning should precede action, and no aspect of planning is more crucial than setting priorities. Failure to set priorities can result in only a little change; setting the wrong priorities may leave the students worse off than before reform was undertaken." (p. 199-200)

References