Alternative education

Charter schools have often boasted about differentiating themselves in the educational
marketplace. With today’s growing emphasis on student achievement, whether this
differentiation has had a positive effect on student learning is still debatable. The purpose
of this exploratory mixed-methods study was to establish if innovation is a reported
practice in charter schools in Miami-Dade and Sarasota Counties in Florida and to
determine if a relationship exists between innovation reporting and student achievement
as measured by Florida school grades. A qualitative analysis of School Improvement
Plans and school websites for a 62 school sample was utilized. As well as a quantitative
measure of the correlation between level of reported innovation in eight categories
(organizational structure, ideology and culture, leadership models, professional
development for teachers, curriculum, technology, parent involvement, and other) and
student achievement, as measured by Florida’s school grade formula. The study found
that charter schools in both counties reported innovation at high levels with only three schools reporting innovations in fewer than five categories of innovation. An examination
of opposing forces of loose and rigid structure, autonomy and policy control, as well as
creativity and standardization led to findings of less reported instances of innovation on
average in schools with looser structure, autonomy, and creativity. Furthermore, Title I
schools and high minority student population schools (≥50%) showed signs of innovation
saturation, with no value added to student achievement (school grade averages) by
reported innovation beyond a moderate level. Still, reported innovation level (overall
categories of innovation) and student achievement (school grade averages) showed a
negligible relationship (r = -.062). In conclusion, reported innovation existed in charter
schools despite opposing forces, but was often similar across charter schools. In fact,
past a moderate level of innovation, there was no value added to school grades for Title I
and high minority charter schools. Yet, a weak, negative relationship existed between
specific reported innovations in combination (professional development in pedagogy,
tutoring programs, non-district behavior programs and incentive, and multiple levels) and
student achievement (school grade averages) which can inform us on the nature of
reporting.

This mixed methods, multisite case study examined the relational ecology of two urban middle schools that had adopted school-wide restorative practices (SWRPs) and the changes that occurred as a result of the reform initiative. The study was conducted in two Title I middle schools in the Oakland Unified School District in California. A positive relational ecology existed in these two urban middle schools, and this ecology was built on the interacting and interrelated themes of relational trust, being heard, a relational-based, student-centered culture, and a commitment to the principles of social justice. The positive relational ecology created a strong foundation upon which change could occur at the organizational, individual, and pedagogical levels. Various structures within the schools, including circles, instructional leadership teams, student councils, and peer mediation, created space for teachers and students to be heard and empowered, which subsequently facilitated change and growth for many administrators, teachers, and students. High turnover, lack of initial and ongoing training, and the development of quasi- or non-restorative processes jeopardized program fidelity. Findings revealed that in these restorative schools, relational ecology and change were inseparable, and that they moved and influenced each other. A positive relational ecology created an environment that enabled leaders and staff to feel safe as they embarked upon the journey of change. Changes in the ways that members of the school communities related to each other on a daily basis provided additional motivation to continue the change effort, and these changes then strengthened the relational ecologies. Findings of this study are significant and have implications for schools and school districts, policy makers, and teacher and leader education programs. Future research should include longitudinal, mixed methods studies that assess the school culture before and after implementing SWRPs, as well as experimental or quasi-experimental designs that compare restorative and non-restorative schools. Such studies may provide more empirical evidence that links healthy relational ecologies to student achievement, less teacher turnover, decreased conflict, and healthier communities, thereby strengthening the case for rejecting punitive and discriminatory zero tolerance school discipline policies and adopting restorative justice in education instead.