Stringfield (1993) discusses the human and fiscal requirements involved in implementing school-improvement plans to benefit at-risk students:
"Understand the demands and limitations of the chosen program. Even a program independently validated and compatible with local predilections has limitations that must be addressed. Programs that may be worthwhile--for example, the Coalition of Essential Schools (CES)--deliberately do not specify curricula at any level of detail. Local faculty must develop units that are compatible with the CES philosophy. This requires time, effort, and development skills not currently found on all faculties. Success for All requires a full-time implementer. Reading Recovery requires extensive staff development for specified teachers, and that training is often not locally available. Failure to build skills and to provide the time necessary to meet these sorts of demands will result in failed implementations. When dealing with students at risk, success for most is not a satisfactory compromise.Understand the requirements for full implementation. The areas probably most often miscalculated in this regard are staff development and planning times. CES assumes shared planning times, yet many schools have attempted to embrace CES principles without scheduling and budgeting the time required. Success for All requires the purchase of an extensive set of materials. The necessary levels of ongoing staff development to successfully implement such programs as the Paideia Proposal are almost invariably underestimated.
Showers, Joyce, and Bennett (1987) note that in order for staff development to actually change teaching, it must include presentation of theory, modeling, time to practice, and immediate, supportive feedback. These are characteristics that make a great deal of sense, yet they are rare in schools. Real change requires all of these elements, and the time and money required to implement such changes must be built into change efforts from the onset.
In this area, it is important to educate both the education bureaucracy and elected officials as to the need for support of full implementation. When fiscal crises come, as they inevitably do, the first thing most boards and superintendents cut is staff development. For programs to become implemented and institutionalized, staff must receive long-term training support." (pp. 99-100)
