.,.. u .-

rflfli‘g‘l

u r
NAM
n

.u '

WE???

é

-‘a .m .
5‘39? “1‘;

r

ESQ;

wwfififififif‘

-‘.-v ..-w-v_‘rt

 

1

m
K“

4".“

3;:3 5 3E». ii;

'32“ I; 8:7 a 9‘ 3

gig; I}
‘-

‘x-~ 7.:
,, . 332k
j‘fi’fif '
#43:?
‘ use 1“.-

g.
‘ .
‘52:.
OI“.
a 3.. .nd

u..-
m~‘

J:- ',
¢ 55’
5'5“
._ ., .
..
:1.

V

5 . I ‘L
A ' ‘ '
‘ 3 ' -' g. y‘ I
» .( , y,-
“law-.411: it!

2'“ «1‘ '
MM!
if

:L

 

LIBRARY

131mm Michigan State
1007 , University

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

WHAT BECOMES OF HIGH SCHOOL REFORM: THE CASE
OF AN ALTERNATOVE SCHOOL

presented by

STEPHEN HEYWOOD MARSDEN

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Ph.D. degree in Educational Administration

 

 

bum/73 ”gr/Lac

Major “Professor’s Signature

 

91am lé) 200'}-
W U

 

Date

MSU is an affirmative-action, equal-opportunity employer

n-n-c-c-.no-s-n-n-.-.--n--n¢—.‘v--u-.-n--.-.----—.--n—--.----.c-a-u--c—-----n-.------—----—--o--o-n-

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DAIEDUE

DATEDUE

DATEDUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p./ClRC/DaleDue.indd-p.1

 

WHAT BECOMES OF HIGH SCHOOL REFORM: THE CASE OF AN
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL
By

Stephen Heywood Marsden

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Educational Administration K-12

2007

ABSTRACT
WHAT BECOMES OF HIGH SCHOOL REFORM: THE CASE OF AN
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL
By
Stephen Heywood Marsden

The purpose of the research was to investigate the factors influencing the
sustainability of an alternative educational program as a high school reform. The general
objective of the study was to collect information from three levels of analysis:
institutional, organizational, and individual.

The research involved a review of the historical development of an alternative
high school, the organizational role of school personnel in identifying and placing at-risk
students in the alternative high school, and the individual educational outcomes of a
group of twelve students selected for placement in the alternative high school. The
findings indicate that educational reform, which departs from the grammar or regularities
of schooling, is less likely to sustain itself as a unique and distinctive feature. Factors
found in the three explanatory ideas help explain the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the
current alternative high school as an educational reform.

A limitation of the study is that it is qualitative in nature: only one school district
was studied, and the number of participants was limited to twenty; hence no broad
generalizations can be made. The use of interviews in this study also has some potential
limitations in as much as there is a possibility of missed responses and/or a lack of

disclosure.

Copyright by
STEPHEN HEYWOOD MARSDEN

2007

DEDICATION
This study is dedicated to my parents, Harvey and Harriet Marsden; my wife, Kristine

Frogner; my son, Matthew S. Marsden; and my daughter Abby E. Marsden

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Although this study and its findings are the responsibility of this author, several
individuals have contributed to its completion. I wish to extend my appreciation to those
individuals who provided guidance and support throughout the completion of this study.

My sincere gratitude goes to my major advisor, Dr. Gary Sykes, who provided his
professional expertise and guidance during my educational years at Michigan State
University. Also, my appreciation is extended to the other members of my advisory
committee, Dr. Maenette Benham, Dr. Philip Cusick, and Dr. Christopher Dunbar, for
their time and constructive critique during the preparation of this study.

I am indebted to the Hilltop School District, who provided support throughout this
process. Considerable gratitude is extended to the Superintendent, the data processing
department, and the numerous support staff for their insight and help in supplying the
necessary information to make this study complete.

A very special thank you is extended to Lisa Parr-Smith and Susan Steigmeyer for
their technical expertise and friendship in editing this manuscript.

I offer my sincere appreciation to Dr. Nancy Owens for her guidance and support
in this study. I would also like to thank Dr. Louis Katz for his untiring time in talking me
through the organization of content and listening to my concerns.

Foremost, I wish to thank my wife Kristine Frogner for her patience,

understanding, and support, which she gave so willingly.

PREFACE

After thirty plus years in the field of education, my interest in “doing what is best
for kids” dominates and drives my daily interactions with students, parents, and
colleagues. As Deborah Meier states, “Schools embody the dreams we have for our
children.” Providing educational opportunities to at-risk students, in the hope of keeping
them in school, is of the utmost importance. I have seen students become turned-ojjf and
tuned-out to their education because of academic failure, attendance problems, low
involvement in school activities, inconsistencies in school policy, and a lack of
connection to the school environment. My interest in alternative education gained
momentum as I saw the procedure by which counselors and administration identified at-
risk students and recommended them for placement in the alternative high school. The
process of identifying and placing at-risk students in the alternative high school program
seemed to be haphazard and confusing. I saw students who were failing enroll
successfully in the alternative program, while others continued to flounder in the
traditional educational program. I began to study the alternative educational program as
one viable resource to help students complete their educational career. When talking
with colleagues, I sensed a mutual feeling of frustration regarding the same issues of
identification and placement of at-risk students in the alternative program. When my
colleagues were asked why some students were referred for placement and other students
were not, they responded, “There’s a lack of commitment on the part of students and
parents. We are missing the students who fall under the radar, and we lose them between
the cracks. We definitely need specific criteria and guidelines for placement.” As I

questioned school personnel, my interest grew and I asked two questions: ( 1) why did

vi

not more students enroll in the alternative program and (2) once there, what influenced
the student success.

Training in special education taught me that students do not learn at the same rate
or in the same way. Failure over an extended period of time tends to produce a feeling
that successful learning is impossible. Students lose interest, and motivation disappears
producing more failure. Disappointment over an extended period of time also results in
the interruption of skill development. The alternative educational program offers the
opportunity for at-risk students to break the failure cycle and achieve the goal of a high
school diploma. Raywid (2001) states that if students have demonstrated they are not
going to make it in one kind of school, we should let them try another. Research over the
last fifteen to twenty years has rediscovered the importance of real engagement in
learning. Engagement depends on authentic learning. Authentic learning occurs when
student interests are stimulated. The purpose of the alternative program is to provide the
opportunity for authentic learning.

There is a story behind this study. Initially, I was interested in why students
dropped out of high school. As I pursued this question, I realized that I was particularly
interested in whether the alternative high school could make a difference in offering
students the opportunity to both complete their secondary education and prevent them
from dropping out. In 2001, I was appointed principal of the Oakwood Alternative High
School in the Hilltop School District*. This appointment afforded me first-hand

experience in the referral process, the factors influencing the placement process, insights

* The name of the alternative high school, traditional high school, and school district has been changed for
confidentiality reasons.

vii

into the inner workings of the educational opportunities offered to the students, and
the educational experiences of the students. During my tenure, I questioned whether
the school was working successfully. I was particularly interested in the educational
experiences of the students and the outcomes regarding the choice of placement. As I
pursued the second question it became clear that my study really was not about how
organizations processed its clients but rather about the success or failure of the
alternative high school reform. My interest evolved to include the history of
Oakwood Alternative High School, the factors influencing the organization (the
school personnel) in processing the students for placement in the alternative school;
and the educational experiences and outcomes of a group of twelve students selected
for placement in the alternative school. The focus of this study was about the much
larger question of why the alternative high school reform had a poor success rate
shown at the three levels of analysis. The research question became what became of

this innovative high school reform?

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................... x
CHAPTER 1 ........................................................... 1
The Problem ......................................................... 3
The Case Study ...................................................... 4
The Research Question ................................................ 10
The Significance ..................................................... 11
CHAPTER 2 .......................................................... 14
At-Risk Students ..................................................... 15
The Alternative High School ........................................... 18
CHAPTER 3 ......................................................... 29
Data Collection ...................................................... 30
Sampling ........................................................... 30
CHAPTER 4 ........................................................... 35
CHAPTER 5 ........................................................... 48
CHAPTER 6 .......................................................... 77
CHAPTER 7 .......................................................... 107
CHAPTER 8 ......................................................... 135
APPENDIX ........................................................... 152
Matrix of School Personnel Interviews ................................... 153
Matrix of Scenarios A Interviews ....................................... 172
Matrix of Scenarios B Interviews ...................................... 176
Completed Student Surveys and Data Tables .............................. 179
Matrix of Student Interviews .......................................... 190
REFERENCES ....................................................... 194
AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT ................................... 204

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 School District Community Profile .................................. 6
Table 1.2 School Enrollment Summaries ..................................... 6
Table 1.3 School District Ethnic Breakdowns ................................. 7
Table 1.4 Stafi‘ Assignments ............................................... 8
Table 1.5 Alternative High School Timeline .................................. 10
Table 2.1 At-Risk Characteristics .......................................... 16
Table 2.2 Alternative Education Programs ................................... 22
Table 3.1 8”I Grade Failures .............................................. 31
Scenario 5.1 Fictional Student IA .......................................... 66
Scenario 5.2 Fictional Student 2A ......................................... 67
Scenario 5.3 Fictional Student 3A .......................................... 69
Scenario 5.4 Fictional Student 4A .......................................... 70
Scenario 5.5 Actual Student I B ............................................ 70
Scenario 5.6 Actual Student 23 ............................................ 7]

Scenario 5.7 Actual Student 38 .......................................... . 72
Scenario 5.8 Actual Student 48 ............................................ 73

Figure 7.1 Stigmatization . .............................................. 126
Table 7.2 Decision Making .............................................. 132
Table 7.3 Trajectory Relationships ........................................ 133
Table 8.1 Alternative School Models ...................................... 136

CHAPTER 1

“Education has been transformed from one of the avenues to economic success to an
exclusive door of opportunity for achieving the good life. Those who have an education
may access the incredible richness of economic opportunity in the United States; those

without it are doomed to a life of economic servitude or even worse.”

R. Barr and W. Parrett

The purpose of this case study is to investigate, describe, and explain the fate of
an alternative high school reform. The study seeks to find out what happened to an
alternative high school that evolved over a twenty year period from having a relatively
clear identity to one that became blurred, diffuse, and ultimately not very effective.

Three trajectories form the focus of this study:

0 First, the institutional (the alternative high school) — what is its
history and purpose?

0 Second, the organizational (the school personnel) — how do they
process students?

0 Third, the client centered (the students moving through the
process) — what influences their placement, educational
experiences, outcomes, and perceptions.

The institutional traiectorv considers school related factors. This idea has been
referred to as the grammar of schooling (Tyack and Cuban, 1993). The grammar of

schooling includes the traditionally accepted practices of age grading, the division of

knowledge into separate subjects, and pre-established curriculum. Students are required
to complete academic tasks and show mastery through examinations. This grammar of
schooling persists because it enables teachers to discharge their expected duties in a
predictable fashion and cope with the everyday tasks that school board, principals, and
parents expect them to perform. At the end of the school year, students are rewarded
with academic credit. Success means earning the required number of credits within a
given school year and moving on to the next grade level, while failure means staying in
the same place or dropping out. Could alternatives that challenge such sturdy
regularities survive and even thrive? Or is it likely that what starts as alternative is
pulled gradually back into the institutional orbit of schooling?

The organizational trajectog takes up processes that educators engage in around
the school in question, most particularly how identification and placement decisions get
made by guidance counselors, principals, and other parties, including students
themselves. School personnel act and react to established polices (written and
unwritten), make decisions based on attitudes and perceptions, and interact with
students.

Client centered trajectoLv refers to students and their career choices during the
school years. By comparing students who attend the alternative schools with those who
qualified but chose instead to attend the regular high school, we can examine the effect
of each school in such terms as student GPA, graduation rates, and post-secondary
plans. The concern here focuses on the educational experiences of the students, their

educational outcomes, and the perceptions of their experiences.

The study uses the term trajectory to indicate the arc of development at these
three levels of analysis over an extended period of time. In this sense the study is
historical, while situating the experiences and perceptions of involved individuals in
larger processes of school (and district) accommodations and tendancies.

The Problem

Americans have created the most comprehensive system of public schooling in
the world, yet fail to reach the total population of our youth. The needs of the at-risk
student population, a term at once capacious and ambiguous, are overlooked. Schools
are faced with the dilemma of what to do with students who (1) are not succeeding in
school and/or (2) do not seem to fit into the institutional mold of schooling; taken in
these two senses, at—risk seems to define a problem that at once refers to agency by
students and to agency by the institution that educates. Dealing with these problems
poses, for both schools and communities, a complex array of moral, ethical, and
educational difficulties (Barr & Parrett, 1995). Forty years ago, students who were
turned ofi and tuned out to learning were referred to as socially and culturally deprived;
later the terminology changed to that of disadvantaged. More recently these students
are described as “disengaged, disconnected, or at-risk” (Barr & Parrett, 1995). Today,
at-risk students are defined as children/young adults who fail to make satisfactory
academic progress, do not behave well in class, and do not do as they are told, or refuse
to “play the educational game” directed by educators. Students identified at-risk are not
limited to any single group. They cut across all social classes and occur in every ethnic

group. Educators and public officials have most often attributed the problem of low

achievement by at-risk students to a lack of ability, character, or motivation. Others, it
should be noted, attribute the problem to the school, not to the students.

The Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students
(1994) estimates that between twenty and forty percent of our country’s children are
considered at-risk for educational failure. The Office of Educational Research and
Improvement (1987) reveals that poor academic performance is the single strongest
predictor of dropping out. It is also reported that the at-risk student’s inability to adapt
to prescribed roles of traditional learners and to traditional curriculum subject matter
leads to low academic performance. The at-risk student often exhibits an inability to
follow traditional schedules and timetables within schools and is challenged with daily
attendance problems. To cope with this challenge one reform that many school districts
have adopted is the establishment of so-called alternative high schools. Educators have
hoped that this structural reform would address the problem(s) of the at-risk population
and so reduce drop-out rates.
The Case Study

In the 1960’s, school districts began to develop and implement a new secondary
school reform to address the problem of student drop-outs -- the establishment of the
alternative high school. The alternative high school was designed to offer to students
identified as being at-risk incentive to complete their educational career. The central
quest of this study looks at the fate of this reform in a single case. The study will look
at the history of one specific alternative high school (Jefferson Alternative High
School), the educators responsible for identifying and processing at-risk students for

placement in this school, and the educational experiences and outcomes of a group of

 

students allocated for enrollment in school. The study follows two groups of students
identified as being at-risk through their four year secondary educational career. One
group of at-risk students chose to enroll in the Brown School District’s alternative high
school, and the other group of at-risk students chose to enroll in the either Lincoln or
Washington Traditional High School. The study may be conceived as a multi-level
case study that is extensive in time while intensive via examination of both institutions
and individuals.

The Brown School District selected for this case study was chosen out of
convenience, easy access to information, and near-by familiarity. The Brown School
District is located in a metro area on the fringe of a large city. Each of the fifteen
elementary schools, three middle schools, two traditional high schools, and the
alternative high school is fully accredited. The school district covers a geographic area
of 35.3 square miles and services a population of 76,150 persons. The total enrollment
of the district is 11,328 students. The alternative educational program draws its
population from five feeder schools, those of three middle schools and two high
schools.

In its mission statement, the Brown School District states, “The education of our
students is our primary focus. We guarantee to all students the knowledge, skills, and
attitudes necessary to become effective citizens of the world. Our students are
successful because parents, staff, and the community share high expectations for quality
instruction and successful student learning. We stress quality. Our students and staff
are challenged to excel. Our students annually represent high achievement in

academics, athletics, career and technical education, and performing arts.”

The Brown School District’s community profile is depicted in Table 1.1

 

Table 1.1

Brown School District Community Profile 1999/2000 School Year

Population 76, 150
Number of Households 30.689
Average Household Size 2.6
Single Parent Household with Children (%) 9.3
Adults in the district with High School Diploma (%) 87.6
Adults in the district with Bachelors Degree (%) 22.7
Median Household Income $59,571
Average Household Income $39,463
School Age Children (%) 17.1

 

Table 1.2 provides data regarding enrollment in the secondary educational

programs (traditional and alternative high schools).

 

Table 1.2

Enrollment Suanaries 1999/2000 School Year *

 

m Traditional Alternative High
9‘h 1,029 94
10th 953 39
11‘h 526 48

12‘h 559 48

 

*Note. The numbers presented in this table reflect a comparison of the enrollments in each grade level at
the Jefferson Alternative High School and the traditional high schools for the specific year 1999/2000.
These figures do not represent, nor can they be interpreted to represent the graduation rates for the

traditional high school and alternative high school. These enrollment numbers are fairly typical each
year.

Enrollment in the alternative program is approximately nine percent of the total

enrollment in the traditional high school program.

Table 1.3 provides the ethnic breakdown of the district’s student population.

 

Table 1.3

Ethnic Breakdowns 1999/2000 School Year

#7. ---,7 i j

Ethnic Breakdown 1999I2000

lu’Asfiah's’E ’7 ’
lHispanic 5.9
DBlack 3.9
ctNat. Amer .7
lCaucasian 92.26

 

 

 

 

The ethnic breakdown of the alternative high school reflects similar patterns. The
majority of the students are Caucasian (ninety-four percent); four percent Hispanic and

two percent African-American.

Table 1.4 provides a breakdown of the staffing assignments for the secondary
educational programs.

 

Table 1.4

Staffing Assignments 1999/2000 School Year

m Traditional High Schools Alternative High School
Total Staff 210 15
Teaching Staff 138 9
Counselors 8 1
Administrators 8 1
Student/Teacher Ratio 23: 1 15 : 1

 

Four years is considered the normal period of time for a high school student to
earn a regular high school diploma. Each student followed in this study was provided
the opportunity to enter or leave the particular educational program (alternative and
traditional high schools) chosen during this four year period.

The student’s grade status is determined by the number of credits the student
earns within a given school year. Students have the opportunity to earn a total of three
credits each semester, or a total of six credits per school year. The following

information is a breakdown of grade standings for the secondary programs:

0 0 - 5 Credits Freshman

0 6 - 11 Credits Sophomore
o 12 - 15 Credits Junior

0 16 — 22 Credits Senior.

A total of 22 credits are required for graduation.

A brief description of the school will help situate the study for the reader. The

program was established in the early 1980’s. The Jefferson Alternative High School

began by enrolling students in the eleventh and twelfth grades only. In the 1990’s, the
ninth and tenth grades were added to the program. Students were recommended for
placement in the alternative program by school personnel and/or by student selection.
The alternative educational program was designed for students who had not been
successful according to the normal standards of the traditional classroom environment
and were not considered to be disciplinary problems. The program offered opportunities
to address the various factors that affect students and their academic shortcomings,
namely academic achievement and attendance. Student success was encouraged
through smaller class size, which permitted teachers the opportunity to better know the
students and to provide a supportive and positive environment through one-on-one
instruction and reinforcement. In addition to academic learning, the alternative
educational program strove to teach the student values and responsibilities necessary to
become productive citizens in the community. The mission statement of the alternative
educational program has been “to meet the students’ needs, both social and academic, to
prepare for the completion of their high school diploma, the world of work, and to
become productive contributing members in our community.” A major part of the story
concerns how this school evolved over an extended period of time, as depicted in Table

1.5. Why such evolution should occur is one of the issues this study ponders.

 

Table 1.5

Alternative School Summm Timeline

 

 

 

 

 

L Alternative School History

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I980 I985 I990 I995 2000 2005
i L
F 1 if i T
Alt. Dropout Work Child 9- 10
Frog. Rate Study Care Gmdes
Estab 33% Be "as Begins Added Leadership
State

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D'l'E Change of Teacher Bench
Partners Leadership Cert Marks CT)”
1.3, Reg. Curricular
Education

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research Questions

The research questions behind this study focus on three levels of analysis:

Institutional - What is the history behind the establishment of the
alternative education program? What was its distinct identity and
mission? How did the school evolve over time and in response to what
set of forces and factors?

Organizational - How were students identified for placement? What
were the criteria for assigning membership? Who makes the decision for
placement in the alternative educational program? What were the
perceptions of the school personnel of the alternative program?

Client Centered — What were the educational experiences of the
students? What were the outcomes of these experiences? What
difference did assignment to the alternative school make in comparison

with continuing in the regular high school?

This study documents how Jefferson Alternative High School lost its identity

and mission; the counselors lost the sense of why the student would go to the alternative

school as opposed to remaining in the traditional high school and allowed the decision

10

for placement to be made by the students, and the data show that the at-risk student who
chose to remain in the traditional high school had a better success rate in terms of
remaining in school, graduating, obtaining employment, and other outcomes. Taken
together these are ironic if not atypical outcomes. They beg for explanations, which
will be supplied, albeit in speculative form, in the concluding chapter.
Siggificance

Tyack and Tobin (1994) report that continuity in the grammar of schooling has
frustrated generations of reformers who have sought to change the standardized
organizational forms. . . . Why do challenges generally not succeed? According to
Tyack and Tobin when reforms present a new departure from the regularities of
schooling, they typically take hold on the periphery of the system in specialized niches,
such as the alternative high school, for groups of students who do not fit the regular
clientele for batch processing. The sustainability of reform is difficult. Why do many
educational reforms fail? During the course of implementation a reform of various
kinds often are conformed gradually but relentlessly to the commonplace outlines of
what Metz (2003) has referred to as real school. There are many forces that influence
the success of the reform including demographic, economic, cultural, political,
sociological, and educational. Why did Jefferson Alternative High School evolve in the
way that it did? After presenting details of the case, the study has applied three
interpretative ideas to the data:

0 Shopping mall high school (Powell et. al., !985)
0 Street-level bureaucracy (Lipsky, 1980)

0 Stigma (Goffman, 1963)

11

Together these disparate ideas help to explain the fate of this particular reform
while pointing to some of the larger issues in the case.

Chapter Two presents a historical perspective of the development and practices
of the alternative high school reform based on the literature review on this subject.

Chapter Three presents the methodology used in this study. Included is the
rationale, data collection, and sampling procedures.

Chapter Four provides an institutional history of the school as situated in its
district. This chapter will describe how, over time, Jefferson Alternative High School
gradually evolved to look in many respects like the traditional high school.

Chapter Five looks at organizational process. The chapter examines the school
personnel responsible for identification of students for placement in the alternative high
school and the decision making process by which placement is made. This chapter
reveals how counselors and others involved in helping students to choose which school
to attend often did not agree on the criteria to utilize in the identification and placement
process because district policies became unclear as the school’s identity and mission
blurred.

Chapter Six presents a client-centered description of twelve students identified
for placement in the alternative high school. The educational experiences of these
students are traced over a four year period and the outcome of their choice of placement
is shown.

Chapter Seven presents an exploration of three perspectives; the shopping mall
high school, street-level bureaucracy, and stigma that explains the trajectory of the

alternative high school reform. The shopping mall high school perspective helps

12

explain the institutional level analysis, the street-level bureaucracy perspective helps
explain both the organizational and client centered analysis and stigma helps explain
both the organizational and client centered analysis.

Chapter Eight reflects my personal observations, thoughts, and reflections

regarding this particular alternative high school reform.

13

CHAPTER 2
“Leaving school is usually one more step on a treadmill of
discouragement, failure, and escape. But the individual
tragedy is also a national waste.”
Dropout Tragedies, Life, 1960

Three trajectories form the focus of the study:

0 First, institutional (the alternative school) — what is its history and
purpose?

0 Second, organizational (the counseling process) — how does it
work?

0 Third, client (the students moving through the process) — what
influences their placement, perceptions, and educational
outcome?

History repeatedly emphasizes dropping out of high school is a serious problem
in public education. In the early 1990’s, statistics from the U. S. Department of
Education showed that about thirty percent of all students entering public high school as
freshmen failed to graduate within the four year period of their schooling (Sherrow,
1996). Student success in school is directly related to the culture of school, which is
based on academic engagement and school membership. Academic engagement is the
student putting forth mental effort to achieve the knowledge and skills associated with
the outcomes of formal schooling. Academic engagement is not present when learning
depends on extrinsic rewards, when learning is restricted, and when educators are

Obsessed with covering all the material. School membership means establishing a bond

14

between the student, the adults in the school, and the norms governing the institution.
School membership is achieved when social relations between the students and the
school exist in both the formal and informal life of the institution. This occurs when the
student is attached, committed, and involved in activities of the institution. If the student
believes that the activities and the goals of the school are inappropriate for him or her,
then the commitment of the student will be weak (Wehlage, 1989).

At-Risl_( Students

Many disruptive forces influence the student’s decision to leave school early.
When the student fails in the school environment, they tend to continue this pattern of
failure in their adult life and vocational world (Bowman, 1960). Students who leave
school can be categorized in two ways. First is the involuntary group. This category is
comprised of those students who leave because of transfer, suspension, and/or expulsion
or as a result of a personal crisis such as illness, pregnancy, or family obligations. The
second category is comprised of students who leave voluntarily. These students either
have alternatives to school participation, or they have found participation in school
completely intolerable or impossible.

Table 2.1 summarizes the key characteristics associated with the at-risk student
and dropping out. The scholars reviewed are listed along the left side of Table 2.1; and
the “X’s” placed in the adjoining squares, identify the commonly held attributes. These
scholars report that the major factors influencing student apathy in learning are:

1. school membership-failure of the student in establishing a feelings of
connectedness to the school

2. lack of academic achievement

15

3. lack of school participation (involvement in extra—curricular activities)
4. truancy

5. conflict with authority figures

6. lack of social and emotional skills (communication skills and poor peer

relationships).

 

Table 2.1

Common Characteristics Identifying At-Risk Students and Dropping Out

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scholars Lack of Lack of Lack of Authority Discipline Lack of
School Academic School Truancy Conflict Problems
Social/Emotion
Membership Achievement Participation Skills
Cervantes, 1965 X X X X X X
Dom, 1996 X X X X
Ekstrom, 1986 X X X X X
Hicks, 1969 X X X X
Kronick/Hargis, X X X X X
1990
Mueller, 1964 X X X X X
Tidwell, 1988 X X X
Wehlage/Rutter, X X X X X X X
1989
Topez/Invanoff, X X X X X X
1962

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These scholars point out that the at—risk student usually follows a sequence of
steps that typically leads to the decision to leave school. The cycle begins with a feeling
that the student does not fit into the school environment (school membership). The
student’s grades begin to decline and failure increases. This leads to a lack of
participation in extra curricular activities, such as attending after school sporting events,
joining clubs, and other social activities. School is viewed as a negative environment.

The student begins to be absent from school more and more frequently and soon

16

encounters conflicts with authority figures because of a lack of social skills necessary
for positive interpersonal relationships with teachers and peers. This leads them to the
next level which is laced with behavior problems and rebellion. The school tries to
correct the behavior with suspensions. This punishment, in turn, leads to parental
involvement, which fosters defensiveness and negativism on the part of the student.
Loss of interest soon leads to grades lower than those of their peers. To avoid the
embarrassment and feelings of inferiority, the student becomes truant more frequently
and participates in more behaviors that require stronger disciplinary action. The student
soon wants to leave this negative environment and enter into the world of work hoping
it will be a more positive and rewarding situation.

Today, at-risk students are defined as children/young adults who fail to make
satisfactory academic progress; do not behave well in class; do not do as they are told;
or refuse to play the educational “game” defined by educators. The at-risk students
often have special needs; they are in the language minority; are disruptive; are pregnant;
are more often emotionally disturbed; are absent more; talk-back to teachers; and may
be quiet and passive kids (Gibson, 1997). The at-risk students do not fit the mainstream
mold (Kerka, 2003). There is a tendency to see at-risk students not as “turned off”, but
as disruptive, deviant, and dysfunctional. Young people considered at-risk need the
same things other children and adolescents need: the opportunity to learn and develop
guidance in making constructive choices, and help with making connections to the
school culture (Grobe, et. al., 2001).

Kronick and Hargis (1990) report that the at-risk student falls into one of four

categories: quiet/passive student, reactive student, adequate or above academic potential

17

and drop-out/drop-in student. Quiet/passive students go unnoticed until they drop out
and are usually comprised of the low achievers who have repeated grade failures. The
reactive students are comprised of students who are out of synchronization with their
academic learning abilities. These, too, are low achievers and have repeated grade
failures; however, they are distinguished from the quiet/passive students in that they
over-react to their chronic failures. They avoid failing by totally avoiding school. The
final group of at-risk students is the drop-out/drop-ins. These students tend to dropout of
their academic learning, but not out of the physical environment of the school. These
students often leave school and then return semester after semester for social reasons.
The Alternative High School

It is estimated that every year, 2.4 million students are considered for placement
in an alternative educational program (Robertson, 1997). Each year, school personnel
face the problem of where to place students who do not seem to fit with the rest of the
school population. “The question is not ‘Is it possible to educate all children well?’ but
rather ‘Do we want to do it badly enough?” (Meier, 1995, pg 12). According to the
American Federation for Teachers, education is responsible for three basic goals:
insuring student safety, preventing disruptions in student learning, and providing
appropriate help to the disruptive and violent student. In order to accomplish these
goals, many school districts have implemented alternative education programs. These
alternative programs have emerged as one way to serve many of our youth who have
not succeeded in the traditional public school setting (Wint, 2003).

According to the Department of Education (2002), a commonly accepted

definition of alternative schools does not exist. However, the Common Core of Data

18

(2002) defines an alternative education school as a public elementary or secondary
school that addresses needs of students that typically cannot be met in the regular
school, provides nontraditional education, serves as an adjunct to a regular school, or
falls outside the categories of regular, special education, or vocational education (U. S.
Department of Education, 2002). It is estimated that there are about 20,000 alternative
programs and schools in the United States (Barr and Parrett, 2001).

During the 1960s and 19703, there was a period of social unrest and upheaval.
Society experienced an avalanche of youthful rebellion that became a stimulus for
action by concerned educators (Sagor, 1999). It was during this time that alternative
schools proliferated across America. School boards and school administrators expressed
genuine sympathy for students who could not or would not succeed in the mainstream.
School officials had to contend with a public that was demanding order and tradition in
the schools. Much of this concern was generated by the depictions of the youthful
rebellions on TV and in the movies. As a result, school boards took steps to deal with
alienated youth and began to allocate funds to help these youth who did not fit the
mainstream. Supporters of the alternative schools argued that the programs were of
value because all children do not learn in the same manner or at the same rate. To be
effective, alternative education must adapt to the uniqueness of the setting, the
transitory nature of the population, and the characteristics of the youth (Guerin and
Denti, 1999). Successful alternative programs searched for ways to make learning
relevant and applicable to life outside of school. These programs offered more hands-on
instruction, smaller class size, resources to assist with social and emotional issues, and

vocational and career emphasis.

19

With federal legislation focusing on “leave no child behind”, there has been a
push for increased accountability. In 2001, NCES surveyed 1,069 school districts about
alternative schools and programs offered in their particular school district. A total of
1,540 school districts responded to the survey. The scope of the study was limited to
public alternative schools, and programs administered by school districts. The study
used the following definitions for at-risk students, alternative schools, and alternative
programs:

0 At-risk students — these are students in jeopardy of educational
failure, as indicated by poor grades, truancy, disruptive behavior,
pregnancy, or similar factors associated with temporary or
permanent withdrawal from school.

0 Alternative schools — usually housed in a separate facility where
the students have been removed from the regular school.

0 Alternative programs — usually housed within the regular school.

The data presented in the NCES study is based on the 848 responding school
district (which is thirty-nine percent of the total districts surveyed) who reported having
alternative schools and programs during the 2000/2001 school year. The total number of
students enrolled in alternative schools and programs was 612,900. Larger districts with
enrollment of 10,000 or more were more likely than smaller districts to have alternative
schools and programs. Of the thirty-nine percent of the districts who had alternative
schools and programs, sixty-five per cent had only one alternative school or program,
and eighteen percent had two schools and/or programs. The study also pointed out that

1.3 per cent of all public school students attend a public alternative school or program.

20

During the 1999/2000 school year, thirty-three percent of the districts with alternative
schools and programs reported that at least one of their schools or programs were
unable to enroll new students because of staffing or space limitations.

According to the study, students enter and exit public alternative schools and
programs for a variety of reasons and on an individual basis. The survey findings
indicate that a variety of misbehaviors were reasons in themselves for transfers to
alternative schools and programs. These misbehaviors included disruption to other
students, possession or use of a weapon, possession or distribution of alcohol or drugs,
physical fights, and disruptive —verbal behavior.

The study reported that seventy-four percent of the districts surveyed have a
policy allowing students to return to their regular school. Twenty-five percent reported
allowing only some students to return, and one percent of the districts did not allow
students to return to their regular school. The reasons given for allowing students to
return to their regular school were improved attitude, behavior, and motivation. One of
the keys to successful alternative schools and programs is the staffing of the program.
The study reports that the most successful programs have staff hired specifically to
teach in the alternative schools. Eighty-six percent of the districts hire teachers
specifically for the alternative schools. Forty-nine percent of the districts reported that
the teachers were transferred by choice from the regular school, and ten percent
assigned teachers involuntarily to teach in the alternative school.

The research also indicated the importance of having ancillary services available

to the at-risk students. The ancillary services included counseling, social worker, and

21

school psychologist. Many of the students need these services to help direct them
towards success in academic areas.

The scholars Raywid (1994), Natriello, et. a1. (1986), Wehlage (1986), and Wint
(2002) report the major characteristics associated with alternative educational programs.
Table 2.2 summarizes their findings. The scholars are listed along the left side of the
table and characteristics are listed across the top of the table. The “X’s” indicate the

attributes most consistently associated with successful alternative educational programs.

 

Table 2.2

Alternative Educational Programs

 

 

 

 

Scholars Low Teacher/ Supportive Student Student School School
Pupil Ratio Environment Centered Engagement Membership Autonomy

Natriello X X X X X

et al, 1986

Raywid, X X X X X X

1994

Wehlage, X X X

1986

Wint, X X X X

2002

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Raywid’s research on alternative educational programs is accepted as one of the
premier standards. “Today’s alternative schools seem a far cry from those of the ‘60’s
when the genre first surfaced in public education” (Raywid, 1994, p 26). The
alternative school reform represents the most definitive departure from the

programmatic, organizational, and behavioral regularities of traditional education. The

22

alternative program was designed as a reform of the traditional high school. It focused
on making a school a community, empowering staff, providing active student
engagement in learning, providing a curriculum that focused on student interests and
needs, and ensuring authentic assessment. But throughout its history there has been
ambiguity about its purposes. Raywid asks, whether it is for all students? Should
enrollment be by student choice or by assignment? Raywid reports two consistencies
that have characterized the alternative program. First, alternative programs were
designed to respond to students who were not responding to the traditional program of
academic achievement. This trait is often linked with the unsuccessful students - those
who were deemed disadvantaged or at-risk and who either could not or would not be
successful in the traditional education program. Second, the alternative program
represents a departure from traditional school organization, programs, and environment.
This trait has linked alternative programs to the idea of innovation and creativity in
practice and organization.

Raywid identifies three pure models of alternative educational programs upon
which all other alternative programs are based. Type I model is referred to as the
popular innovation. This model strives to make schools challenging and fulfilling for
all of the students involved. This type of alternative program reflects organizational and
administrative departures from the traditional programmatic innovations and is likely to
reflect themes or emphases pertaining to course content or instructional strategy.

Raywid’s Type 11 model is referred to as the last chance. In this program,

students are usually assigned to the program and include in-school suspension

23

programs, cool-down rooms, or long term placements for chronically disruptive
students. In this type of program students do not have choices or options.

Raywid’s Type 111 model is the remedial program. This form of alternative
program focuses on providing remediation or rehabilitation, which can be academic,
social/emotional, or both. This program model centers on the idea that after successful
treatment, students can regain entry into the mainstream program.

In practice, alternative programs are usually a blend of these models. For
example, a Type 11 program may adopt Type III aspects. It determines how the school
will be evaluated; how the students will be placed, and what is assumed about the
school and the students

Alternative models 11 and III are based on the assumption that the problems lie
within the student. Alternative program model I assumes that the problems can be
explained by the school/student match. By altering the school’s program and
environment, the student’s responses will be altered.

How do these programs rate in evaluation? According to Raywid, the Type 11
programs yielded the fewest benefits. His analysis reveals that this program made no
difference in dropout or referral rates and contributed nothing toward resolving the
problems they were thought to solve. In Type 111 programs, student behavior improved
in the supportive environment. However, the program had two major disadvantages.
First, the program is very costly because of the low teacher/pupil ratios. Second, the
student success was temporary. When the students returned to the traditional programs,
the students reverted to the old habits of not being academically engaged and behavior

problems re-emerged.

24

The Type I model has experienced more success than the Type II and 111
models. The success experienced in model I came through supportive programs for the
students and innovations in presentation of instruction; for example, utilizing hands-on
instruction for the students rather than the old standard lecture.

Alternative programs adopted by school districts are usually a mixture of the
three models. Raywid reports that successful alternative programs were marked by
small teacher/pupil ratios, programs designed by those who were going to operate them,
teachers who chose to work in the alternative program, students and parents who chose
to participate in the program, and a structure able to maintain a high degree of
autonomy. Altogether, there are three sets of factors that appear to account for the
success of the alternative program. First, the school generates and sustains a sense of
community. Second, the school makes learning engaging. Third, the school provides
the organization and structure needed to sustain the first two. Research supports the
importance of making alternative programs a place where students want to be affiliated.
Raywid reports that the alternative school’s most important facet is they are a true
departure from the traditional school’s teacher-student interactions. Success depends on
attention to cultivating a strong sense of connection among the students and between the
students and teachers.

Raywid points out in her research that in order for alternative programs to be
successful, systemic change must occur. This supports Tyack and Tobin’s (1994)
research on the endurance of reform. In order for reform to be sustainable it must be
internalized into the traditional regularities of schooling. Successful alternative

programs are contingent on system-wide support, which in turn calls for school district

25

and state transformation. A good alternative program represents a carefully built
community, an engaging curriculum, and a synchronized set of organizational standards
and arrangements.

Why has there not been a strong movement toward developing alternative
programs? Raywid’s answer lies in the lack of instructional legitimacy. Alternative
programs have an image problem. This is due to the mixing of the three models into a
single inaccurate composite, and partly from the school for losers’ bias. Raywid (1994)
points out that this negative image will continue as long as there remains a single
standardized program plus one or two others to accommodate deviants. Traditionally
school improvement has sought reform through tightening and intensifying
bureaucracy, while alternative programs pose an organizational alternative to
bureaucracy.

Today, alternative programs face several challenges. These include the selection
and placement process, the operational facilities and materials utilization (which include
the structural facilities housing the alternative program and the educational materials
used for instruction), and perceptions by the public about the program. Nearly all
schools claim to hold high expectations for all students, but in reality what is professed
is not always practiced (Lumsden, 1977). There is a tendency to see the at-risk student
not as tumed-off, but rather as disruptive, deviant, and dysfunctional (McGee. 2001).
According to McGee alternative schools are no longer seen as creative outlets for
students whose needs are not being met by the traditional school. They are perceived as
places where disruptive students are sent in order to protect and benefit the students

who remain in the traditional school setting. The negative image of the at-risk students

26

entering alternative schools limits the number and the diversity of the students going
into the alternative program (McGee, 2001). All too often alternative schools are
viewed as dumping grounds or warehouses for difficult students.

Alternative schools often have problems in credibility as a result of the
inadequate physical structure and educational content presented within the program.
Alternative schools frequently have only old, out-dated textbooks, boring workbooks
and repetitive tasks, limited expectations from teachers, outdated computers, no
gymnasium or library, and limited cafeteria services.

In order to be effective, alternative education must adapt to the uniqueness of the
setting and the characteristics of the students attending the alternative program (Guerin
and Denti, 1999). Lange and Sletten (2002, p. 2) report “There is still very little
consistent, wide-ranging evidence of their effectiveness or even an understanding of
their characteristics.” This is in part due to the absence of a clearly established, widely
accepted definition framework of alternative schools.

Summary

The contributions of the studies and ideas presented in this review are limited in
that much of what has been gathered has been based on survey information that dealt
with responses to Likert-type surveys. Researchers often assume causality without
actually reporting the students’ perspective. Turning off and tuning out to the
educational process are facilitated by factors that contribute to the alienation students
feel and their sense that major discrepancies exist between what the school promises

and what can be delivered (LeCompte and Dworkin, 1991).

27

This study will analyze the historical development of one alternative high school
with regards to its conception and evolvement over a twenty year period. The research
will be looking at what became of this alternative program? To answer this question,
the study will look at the organization’s school personnel and their responsibility in
providing or not providing support to the program through their perceptions and will
look at the experiences of two groups of students recommended for placement in the

alternative program through their perceptions and educational outcomes.

28

CHAPTER 3

This case study is set in the Brown School District in Michigan. The aim of the
study is to provide perspective in understanding what became of an alternative high
school reform. The study will provide an understanding of the factors that influence:

0 Decision making in the referral and placement process of students
identified as at-risk in an alternative educational program

0 the social and cultural ambiguities and stigmas that influences the
selection and placement process from the insider’s perspective

0 the latent function of the alternative educational program

0 the evolving history of the alternative educational program, and the
perceptions of the participants regarding their educational experiences
and outcomes.

The insider’s perception of reality is instrumental to understand and accurately
describing situations, behaviors, and feelings reported in this case study. Recording
and reporting the decision makers’ voices will help to provide a better understanding
regarding the consistencies and inconsistencies that influence the selection process of
students identified as at-risk for placement in an alternative educational program.
Service bureaucracies consistently favor some clients at the expense of others, despite
the organizations’ official regulations to the contrary. To understand how and why these
consistencies and inconsistencies occur contrary to established rules and policy, we
need to know how the individuals who make the decisions in the organization
experience the milieu of the environment. It is important to understand what factors or

issues influence their decisions making. This research looked at the identification

29

process of the at-risk students, the placement process, and the outcomes of the
placement process. The at-risk students’ academic achievement, attendance, and
perceptions of their high school experiences will be reported.
Data collection
Data collection was conducted in three stages. Stage one: academic

information was collected from Brown School District’s student records regarding
attendance, academic achievement, and graduation during a four year period from
1999/2000 to 2002/2003. Stage two: data was collected from counselors and
administrators regarding the identification and selection criteria of the at-risk students.
This information was collected through one-on-one interviews with the administration
and counselors. Stage three: data was collected from students identified at-risk and
their parents via surveys and phone interviews; this data focused on student and parent
perceptions of the educational experiences and outcomes of the student’s education.

The researcher used the respondent’s generalized answers and verbatim
quotations from the interview questions. The generalized answers allow the reader to
judge the quality of the work and to gain first hand insight into the experiences that the
individuals encountered. Verbatim quotations provide concise, accurate, and personal
descriptions of the secondary high school climate and the opportunities afforded to the
at-risk students in dropout prevention programs.
Sampling

The course of this study followed two groups of students identified as ‘at-risk’
through a four-year period (1999/2000 through 20002/2003). Students in each group

were identified as at—risk according to the school district’s informal selection criteria of

30

poor attendance and poor academic achievement. Poor academic achievement is defined
as failing one or more core academic (language arts, math, science, and social studies)
classes in a semester during the eighth grade year. Recommended for placement in the
Jefferson Alternative High School at the end of eighth grade were 93 students from a
total of 861. These 93 students were then divided into two groups. One group of 51
students actually enrolled in the alternative high school. The other group of 42 students
chose to enroll in the traditional high school. These two groups were then divided into
male and female members. Six males were randomly selected in each group.
Both groups were followed through the school years 1999/2000 to their
graduation in the school year 2002/2003. The following outcomes were studied:
1. Educational
2. Occupational
3. Personal/Life satisfaction
Table 3.1 below shows the total number of students enrolled in the eighth grade
at the three middle schools, the number of students failing one to four academic classes
each semester during the 1998/1999 school year, the number of students recommended
for placement in the alternative educational program, and the number of students who

chose to enroll either in the alternative program and the traditional high school.

 

Table 3.1

8’'1 Grade Failures in the 1998/ 1999 School Year

 

Enrollment Failing 1-4 classes Recommended/ Not placed Recommended/Ple
861 204 42 51

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31

 

Data were collect via school records regarding attendance patterns, academic
achievement, and grade retention, and the graduation rates in 2003 at the end of the four
year period of 1999 to 2003. Each student in each group was given a survey to
complete regarding his high school experiences. In addition to completing the survey,
each student was contacted via the telephone and asked a series of ten open—ended
questions regarding perceptions of his high school experiences, post high school
educational pursuits, employment information, and personal life satisfaction.

Parents of these students were surveyed to gather data regarding family
demographics, socio-economic status, and general educational information. Further,
administrators and counselors from the middle schools, high schools and alternative
schools were interviewed regarding the at-risk student identification and selection
process for the alternative program. Each of the participants from this group was given
two sets of scenarios consisting of a brief educational description of four students. The
first set of scenarios was four fictitious students and the second set of scenarios was
four actual students. Administrators and counselors read each scenario to determine the
possible placement of the student in the alternative educational program.

The following questions were addressed to administration, counselors, and
students:

1. How are students identified as being at-risk? What school district policy is

followed in the identification and placement process? These questions are

directed to the decision making process.

32

2. How do administrators and counselors describe the educational environment
provided to the at-risk students? These questions are concerned with the
potential influence of stigma on the educational facilities provided to the at-
risk students. The administrators and counselors are viewed as the acting
agents within the school context. Their roles influence the experiences of
the at-risk students.

3. What do administrators and counselors do to accurately monitor, analyze
and respond appropriately to the concerns and needs of the at-risk student
that impacts on the student’s school experiences? The focus is placed on the
data and information gathered to monitor of the student’s learning and level
of involvement in school, the communication process and the quality of
promoting school membership between the student, parent and educational
environment of the school.

4. What influences does the choice of placement have on educational outcomes
of the at-risk students? The focus centers on understanding the student’s
perspective of schooling and how this reaction to placement in either the
alternative or traditional educational program influences educational
outcomes.

5. How does the influence of the alternative educational program impact the
student’s school experiences and the decision to complete the educational
process? Doe the perceptions of the educational process, as seen by

administration, conform to the principles set forth by the theories of what

33

causes feelings of alienation, disconnectedness to school membership, and
the influences of emotional intelligence?

The study was also concerned with capturing, interpreting, and explaining the
ways in which individuals, groups, and organizations are influenced in the decision
making process for placement of their clients in an alternative educational program.
The researcher looked for general statements about the alternative educational
programs, the perceptions of the educational process regarding the academic, and the
social and emotional needs of the at-risk students.

The researcher organized and interpreted the data, generated categories, themes
and patterns, and searched for alternative explanations of the data.

This study is limited by the selection of the small number of all male
participants and the relatively small geographic area from which they came, thus the
generalizations are limited by such a small sample. Second, minority youth were not
studied. Male students were selected because of researcher preference and are
justifiable, as the purpose of the study is to report the voice of the student regarding
their individual school experiences. Based on the researcher’s interest and the
methodology used in this study, the researcher chose to limit the data collection to the
student’s self-perceptions about his experiences in school. The researcher is interested

in the thinking, values, beliefs, and school experiences of the student.

34

CHAPTER 4

Like many school districts across the country, the Brown School District
experienced growing concern with graduation and dropout rates. During the 1960’s and
1970’s, at—risk or disengaged students were ignored. Students who were discipline
problems were suspended. Students who had attendance problems were notified that
when they hit the magic number of twelve absences, they would lose credit in the class.
Little or nothing was done to offer these students alternative choices except to
encourage them to attend adult education classes.

The Brown School District implemented its alternative program in the early
1980’s. The program began as a Personal Development Program (PDP). “The dropout
rates in the high schools were extremely high. The central administrative office decided
that it was time to develop a program that would combat the high dropout rates”
(Interview with School Administrator, 2001). The program was primarily designed for
junior and senior classes that met off-campus (which meant the program was housed in
a separate facility away from the existing high schools). The program targeted the
student, 16 years of age, who was having problems on the main high school campus, but
who was not a major discipline problem. Students were often referred to as the kids in
the cracks. The program was modeled after the adult education program. Teachers
were hired from the adult education program, and as in the adult education program,
teachers were not required to be State certified teachers. The Jefferson Alternative High
School issued high school credits, and students had to abide by the existing student code
of conduct. The foundation of the school was to offer to the student a personalized

approach. The idea was to offer more flexibility with fewer standards of achievement.

35

The program offered classes in language arts, social studies, math, science, and
vocational and business skills. The regular school rules did not apply: “For example, if
the student wanted a cigarette, during the breaks he/she could step outside, have a
smoke and not suffer any disciplinary consequence” (Interview with School
Administrator, 2001).

The student was required to sign a contract prior to admission to the alternative
program and to abide by the school district’s attendance and disciplinary policy. These
rules included a dress code, appropriate language, and mandatory attendance. The
attendance policy operated much like that in the adult education program. The
attendance criteria consisted of completing a specified number of instructional hours.
The student was allowed a total of 21 hours of missed instruction. Academic credit was
awarded based on academic achievement and the completion of the specified number of
hours of instruction.

If a student wanted to take a day off, no questions were asked. For example, one

student came in and stated ‘I’m going to take the day off. What do you think?’ I

responded with ‘Well, you’ve got twenty-one hours you can miss. You’ve got

some time; it’s your call. You don’t have to be here, and I’m not asking you
what the reason is for you wanting to miss. You’re an adult you make the call.

But remember that if you get to the twenty-one hours, and then you get in an

accident or get sick, or God forbid someone in your family dies, you will be

dropped for the rest of the semester, and you’ll lose your credit.’ The student
thought it over and said ‘Okay, I guess I’ll stay.’ Student attendance hours were

posted. This allowed the students to check their attendance on a daily basis.

36

It worked like magic. We even noticed that students were checking on each
other. We had one student come in to the office and ask if his friend was in
attendance. When he found out that his friend was absent, the student asked if he
could go home and get him so he wouldn’t be dropped from the program. The
students watched out for each other. They began to take ownership. (Interview

with School Administrator, 2001)

The program received referrals from the regular high schools counselors. At
first, many of the students referred to the alternative program were discipline problems.
The program’s initial premise was not to accept the student with discipline problems.
The first semester the alternative program was opened, 95 students enrolled. Students
had to go through a screening interview where grades, attendance, and disciplinary
records were checked. The policy of the alternative program was explained, and the
student signed a contract stipulating that nonattendance or discipline issues would result
in being dropped from the program. At the end of the first semester, half of the students
dropped out. This high rate of dropping out was due to violations of the attendance
policy. This failure rate caused the administration to question the attendance policy, but
after much deliberation by the staff and the administration, it was decided that the
attendance policy must be retained. The second semester 90 students enrolled. At the
end of the second semester, 60 students earned credit. The dropout rate had declined
from 50% to 33%. The program was beginning to show some success.

Our admissions criterion was to help the kids in the cracks (the students who

were non achievers but did not act out or call attention to themselves). The

student who was constantly high or who was in the basement (again this referral

37

is made to the student who did not pass academically, but still attended on a
daily basis) was not accepted. The program was not going to do anything
different for the student who was in the basement than was being done at the
regular high school. We would just end up kicking them out. They needed help

from some place else. We wanted the student that was lost, the one getting D’s

and E’s. We wanted the student who just did not want to be in school, the one

who couldn’t wait to reach age 16 and dropout. This is the ones! Give us a shot

at him. (Interview with School Administrator, 2001)

The alternative program started with three classrooms and one room for the
administration (which consisted of a principal and a secretary). The teaching format was
different from that of the regular high schools. Teachers were hired under an adult
education contract. They were paid an hourly rate.

The teachers we hired for the alternative program wanted to teach in a different

environment. Many of the teachers we hired were the more seasoned teachers.

The teachers were thrilled to be involved with the program and were having a

good time with the students. Our classrooms looked a lot different from the

regular high school classrooms. You could walk in to a classroom and see
students sitting on top of the filing cabinets or sitting with their feet up on the
desk. The teachers taught the students how to relate to each other and to adults.

We taught the students to use polite communications; ‘How do you do! It’s nice

to meet you.’ The students learned that they were part of the school. (Interview

with School Administrator, 2001)

38

During the alternative school’s second or third year, a partnership was formed
with Detroit Edison. One of Detroit Edison’s executives heard about the school and its
alternative approach to education. The executive approached the administration with a
proposal to form a business/educational partnership. The students were taught job
shadowing, given vocational opportunities, and taught employability skills necessary to
get and retain a job in industry. Frequently students participated in field trips to various
businesses and industries, such as the Fermi Nuclear plant. The students were given
opportunities to job shadow employees at Detroit Edison, whether as a receptionist or a
lineman.

One time, Detroit Edison was putting on a big gala event in downtown Detroit.

Students were asked to help work at the event; they were given the opportunity

to greet guests, to open their car doors, to escort the guest down the red carpet,

or to work in the coat check. Detroit Edison even provided tuxedos for students.

This opportunity solidified our partnership. It was terrific. Students began to see

the importance of what they were learning. The students wrote papers about

their experiences. This partnership provided the alternative program the chance

to expand. (Interview with School Administrator, 2001)

The next year the alternative program began to incorporate a work-study aspect.
The student would attend school for a half-day and then report to a job site for the
remainder of the day. The student was allowed to earn up to two credits for their work
experience. The only conditions were that the students had to be at their job sites on a
daily basis and receive good work evaluations from their employers. The student also

had to maintain employment for the length of the semester.

39

The teachers acted as mentors to the students. If a student came up a half credit
short from graduating, the teacher would assign to the student an independent study.
Even the administrator got involved.

One time a student came to me and told me he was a half credit short in English.

The administrator asked the student what interested him. The student said he

was an avid deer hunter. The administrator and the student designed a project to

study deer in their natural habitat. The student went to the DNR and researched
the most populated areas in the county. The student selected a site, set up a deer
blind, and video taped the feeding habits of deer. The student supplied feed for
the deer and graphed the number of pounds of deer feed consumed and the
feeding times. The student turned in a 75-page paper, typed and with pictures.

This is something a dropout never would have done at the regular high school. It

was the best thing I had ever seen. When I took the paper to the English teacher,

her response was ‘Oh my God. Wow, it was there all the time.’ That student
came back to see me a month ago, and today he is the director of transportation

at a neighboring school district. (Interview with School Administrator, 2001)

The alternative program evolved over the next couple of years. The program
was moved to a larger facility. A day care facility was offered for the student with
young children. The course offerings changed.

We began offering different perspectives on the regular academic

subjects. The academic requirements were there, but the venue was

different. For example, we substituted the History of the Wild West and

Star Wars for the mandatory social studies. The school incorporated a

40

school store. Students were awarded credit based on the success of the

store’s operation. The student’s grade was based on how far off the

‘till’ was at the end of each week. If the student slipped merchandise

to friends, and the inventory did not match the gross receipts, the

student’s grade went down. The program became very successful.”

(Interview with School Administrator, 2001)

In the 1990’s there was a change in the school district’s leadership. A new
superintendent was hired. It was suggested that the alternative program adopt the
quality schools philosophy espoused by Glasser’s. The program was changed to
accommodate ninth and tenth grade students. The idea was to work with the at-risk
student and then send them back to the regular high school. The program was moved
again to an old renovated elementary building. The staff was now required to be state
certified. Teachers were held accountable for teaching the school district’s educational
benchmarks. Content areas were linked to the same textbooks used at the regular high
school. The staff was told that if a student was to return to the regular high school from
the alternative program, the student had to be familiar with the academic content used at
the high school.

The student was expected to achieve the benchmarks (levels of

academic proficiency) designed by the school district for math, science,

language arts, and social studies. The at-risk students had to achieve the

same levels of proficiency dictated by the MEAP test. The only

difference between the alternative program and the regular high schools

was the at-risk student was off-campus, and the class size was smaller.

41

New times, new thinking, accountability, pressure for mastery learning,

and a lack of vision that not all students learn in the same way or at the

same rate caused the alternative program to change. The central

administration got caught up in the philosophy of no child left behind.

The at-risk student wouldn’t be left behind; they’d just be left in places

where they could function best. The alternative program has become

less and less alternative (Interview with School Administrator, 2001).

Community members and school personnel thought the program was becoming
nothing more than a watered down version of the regular high school. Staff
disenchantment grew as a result of the new expectations placed on them. The program
changed again in 2000. Legislative changes (by the State Board of Education) were
affecting the total educational perspective of the school district. These changes, such as
grading the school district on graduation rates, drop out rates, State requirements for
MEAP testing, and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) forced the school district to
implement cross-curricular education. This meant that all secondary schools were to
provide the same content class offerings in all its secondary programs. In other words,
all of the high schools were required to offer the same content in the academic classes
offered in the district. All language arts classes were required to teach the same content
and use the same materials. The alternative program was required to use the same
textbooks, benchmarks, and course content as used in the traditional high school. To
accomplish this change, the alternative program’s course offerings had to match those
offered at the traditional high school. The child care center provided to the students was

dropped. The work-study program was dropped. Students were required to take the

42

traditional language arts, math science, and social studies. Elective classes included art
and computer keyboarding. The business/education partnership fell by the wayside.
What had been an alternative educational program was now becoming a traditional
educational program.

Today the alternative education program is divided into two schools. One
alternative program is designed for students 16 years of age or older and operates under
the guidelines of adult education. The second alternative program is designed for at—risk
students in the ninth and tenth grade. This is the alternative education program under
study.

Summary

The alternative school was established as a result of Brown School District’s
concern about high drop out rates. The dropout rate is calculated by a State of
Michigan using a specific formula. The formula’s end result is a calculation of the
number of students entering the ninth grade and the number of students in that class
who graduate four years later. The decision was twofold. The school district’s decision
to implement the Jefferson Alternative High School was influenced by (1) the State
Board of Education and (2) the policy goals of advocacy for students and meeting the
mission statement; that students become contributing citizens in the community. It was
modeled after the school district’s adult education program and was designed to meet
the educational needs of the eleventh and twelfth grade students. The intent of the
alternative school was to offer a more flexible curriculum that provided the student with
a less restrictive academic environment. Students with poor attendance and low

academic achievement levels were placed in the program. Students with disciplinary

43

problems were not accepted. The program offered classes in the basic academic areas
(English, math, science, and social studies) as well as classes in vocational and business
skills. Class size was kept at a minimum, approximately 10-15 students per classroom.
The alternative program was distinguished from the traditional program in several
ways:

The regular school rules did not apply. Students were expected to abide by

the school district’s code of conduct, but some infractions were overlooked,

such as smoking or skipping. Students were given more ownership for personal

behavior. Students collaboratively designed a contract regarding expectations in
school and behavioral considerations. Students were given the opportunity to
help write the school’s rules and classroom expectations regarding acceptable
behavior and grading policies. An example of this input is that students were
offered alternative ways of completing assignments. Not all students were good
at writing research papers. Students were asked ‘What would be a fair way for
you to demonstrate your mastery of this particular skill (Interview with School

Administrator, 2001).

During the first few years of operation, student success was minimal. The
student had difficulty adjusting to expectations placed on them. There was a 50%
dropout rate the first year. The administration and teaching staff, however, stood their
ground and maintained that the program would be successful. During the second year,
the dropout rate was reduced to 33%. The staff worked to change the perception of the
alternative school. The staff taught the students communication skills and how to relate

to each other and to adults. Students began to feel that they were part of the school.

44

School membership began to be established. Student ideas and input were valued and
important. As the school moved into its third and fourth years, a work-study program
was introduced. Students were taught employability skills. Partnerships with local
businesses and one corporation (Detroit Edison) were established. Students
incorporated on the job work experience, job shadowing, and a continuation of good
communication skills. Teachers mentored the students and implemented alternative
approaches to teaching the core academics.

Over the next couple of years, the program moved to a larger facility. A day
care program was added to allow single parent families to continue their education.
Course work was made relevant to the needs of the students. One example cited was
the implementation of a school store. Students’ grades were based on the successful
operation of the store. Students learned math, problem solving skills, and consumer
awareness.

In the 1990’s, leadership within the Brown School District changed. Concern
for cross-curricular instruction arose. The district adopted Glasser’s philosophy of
quality schools. Ninth and tenth grade classes were added to the program. The
teaching staff was required to have State Certification. Teachers and students were
required to meet the school district’s benchmarks for education in the core academic
areas. Students were expected to achieve the same levels of academic proficiency as
those enrolled in the traditional high school program. If a student wanted to transfer
from Jefferson Alternative High School back to the traditional high school they would
be familiar with the academic content and expectations in the traditional high school

setting.

45

More students with behavioral and social problems were referred to the
alternative program. As reported, “New times, new thinking, accountability, pressure
for mastery learning, and a lack of vision that not all students learn in the same way or
at the same rate caused the alternative program to change” (interview with school
administrator, 2001). This was a change made by Brown School District to
accommodate the concern of treating the children en mass, rather than individually.
Students with behavioral issues were problematic. Recommendations were made to
make the environment in the traditional high school more conducive to academic
achievement and to provide a safer environment for the daily operations of the building.

In the late 1990’s and early 2000, new leadership was hired, and the alternative
program changed again. The curriculum mirrored the curriculum found in the
traditional program. Students had to take traditional language arts, math, science, and
social studies. The elective classes were limited to computer keyboarding, art, and
reading. Gone were the work-study programs, day care, and business partnerships.
Over the years, more students were recommended for placement in Jefferson
Alternative High School, based on disciplinary problems. The concept of the
alternative program followed Raywid’s conceptualization of the three types of
alternative programs. The Brown School District’s alternative program began as a
school of choice. It incorporated the idea of both restructuring and of a departure from
the traditional educational program. Administration believed that the basic problem of
the students’ lack of achievement lay with the design of the school. Great effort was
taken to provide an educational setting that established the concept of school

membership. Students were offered courses that were relevant to their interests and

46

needs. Success was achieved in lowering drop out rates. The school district had
established a low teacher/student ratio which was the only difference in the set—up. As
the program grew from an 11 — 12 program to a 9 — 12 program, it changed its
conceptual goal of providing an alternative program for the kids in the cracks to a
program goal of rehabilitation in academic achievement in order to return the alternative
student back to the traditional high school, thus the change in the curriculum. The
original purpose of the Jefferson Alternative High School which was to meet the needs
of the students was abandoned to meet the educational demands placed on the school
district by the State’s educational concerns, those of grading of school districts, MEAP
scores, and NCLB.

The changes made to the alternative school were creating a school alternative in
name only. The distinctive features of the structure during the original implementation
were now blurred. The succession of different leaders, the concern for standardization
to promote educational efficiency and academic accountability, confusion in the criteria
for assigning membership, and the lack of commitment/priorities all influenced the

changes in the alternative high school.

47

CHAPTER 5
The school personnel who participated in this study included two ninth grade,
high school dean of students, two high school counselors, three middle school
counselors, and the counselor from the alternative educational program. Each of these

participants was asked questions regarding:

1. Identification process of at-risk students for placement in the
alternative educational program
2. Major factors that influence the placement decision
3. Factors that influence the at—risk student’s choice between enrollment
in the alternative educational program or the traditional high school
program.
4. Challenges encountered in the placement of at-risk students in the
alternative educational program
Dean_s of Students
Betty is the Dean of Ninth Grade Students at Lincoln High School, one of the
two high schools in Brown School District. Betty has been in education for fourteen
years. She spent seven years teaching math at a middle school in the Brown School
District followed by a transfer to Lincoln High School, one of Brown’s two traditional
high schools, to teach math. After completing an administrative internship, Betty was
promoted to the position of Dean of Students. Betty has been in this current position for
two years; her primary responsibility is to oversee the academic progress of ninth

graders.

48

Betty was asked about the written policy regarding the establishment of the
alternative program, identifying at-risk students, and the placement process of those
students into the alternative program. Betty reported that she had seen nothing written
about these issues. She said that the unwritten policy for identifying and placing at-risk
students is “a student between fourteen and sixteen years of age, who was getting D and
E grades, not achieving the school district’s academic bench marks, or wanted to be in
smaller classes.” Betty talked me through the referral process.

Well, a referral is usually made by a teacher, counselor, or me. I look at poor

attendance and poor grades. Then I talk to the student about the alternative

program. I tell the student that the classes are small, which allows for more one-
on-one instruction. If the student is interested, I call the parents and talk to
them. If I get a positive reaction I fill out an application and send it over to the
alternative school and they take over the process.
When asked what happens when the alternative school receives the application, Betty
reported that once the application is sent to the alternative school, it is up to the parents
to contact the school and set up an appointment to meet with the counselor.

Betty reported that the biggest challenge is the perception of the parents and/or
the student regarding placement. “The alternative school is seen as a place for druggies.
The school is seen as a place for bad kids.” Betty also reported that there is no
evaluation policy, no statistical data on the success rate of at-risk students returning to
the traditional school, and no data on graduation rates.

Who actually decides whether or not the student is placed in the alternative

program? She reported that school administrators and counselors make the

49

recommendation, but ultimately it is the parents and students who make the final
decision:

It should be up to the educators. The student should have to attend for at least

one semester. We have very little control overt the decision to enroll. Parents

are reluctant to make the decision. We see students who have on-going behavior
and academic problems. We make repeated suggestions for the student to enroll
in the program, but the parents’ perceptions of the program as being a bad
school keeps them from enrolling their kid. Our goal is to get the student to
graduate. We need to do everything we can to ensure this happens. It’s simply
because the parents don’t want to have their child leave the regular high school.

They want their child to be in an environment that they have been accustomed to

in the past.

Betty reported that she believed that the school district did not have a high
priority in supporting the alternative program. “There is a lack of commitment to
identify at-risk students. It would be nice if we could place all the students, but we
don’t have a large enough facility. It comes down to money.” When asked if discipline
issues enter into the referral process, Betty responded, “It depends on the discipline
problem. Misbehaving is not a reason to deny placement, but students with major
problems like drugs, fighting, and intimidation are not referred for placement.” Betty’s
response led me to ask if the referral and placement process is working. Betty stated
that it works for only a small minority of students. “Some students are placed that
shouldn’t be and some that would benefit are not placed because they want to stay at the

regular high school for social reasons.”

50

The second interview was conducted with the Dean of Ninth Grade Students at
the Washington High School, Lincoln High School’s sister traditional program. Walter
has twenty—eight years of experience in education. He began his teaching career as a
high school math teacher. After teaching ten years, Walter received his Masters in
counseling and became one of Washington’s counselors. Walter completed an
administrative internship, was promoted to the dean of students, and has been in this
position for the last five years. Walter’s primary responsibility is to oversee the
academic progress of the ninth graders.

What was the school district’s written policy for identifying at-risk students and
placing them in the alternative program? Walter responded that he knew of no written
policy. “Classification of students is vague. The intent of the alternative program was
for students who were struggling academically, but it is difficult at times to define what
is meant by struggling student.” I asked Walter to describe the referral process.

The counselors and I look at the student’s progress. If the student has not been

successful in two or more academic classes, we contact the parents and suggest

that they investigate the alternative program. We tell them that the alternative
program may be able to help build the necessary skills for their child to be more
successful in high school.
Walter reported that the greatest challenge is not one of identification, but of placement
in the alternative high school. It is in eliminating the misconceptions parents and
students have about the alternative program. “Students don’t want to be separated from
their peers and friends. Parents see the alternative school as being a setting where the

student will be stereotyped.”

51

Walter stated the school district had a low priority at-risk students and placing
them in the alternative program. “We have to come up with ways to dispel the myth that
the alternative school is a school for students with behavior problems.” I asked Walter if
discipline issues were a factor influencing the placement process. “NO, it’s strictly
based on academics. Discipline problems should not be referred.” I followed Walter’s
response by asking if the referral process was working. Walter stated:

The process is working in theory. If we continue to allow the parents and

students to be the ones who are given the power to make the decision about

placement, then the answer is no. In reality, we are not doing all we can to help
he students.”

What should be done to make the program more successful? Walter answered,
“Good communication between educators and parents. We (educators) need more
support in our recommendations, we need more support financially, and we need to
dispel the stereotypes.”

High School Counselors

The third interview was with Harriet, one of Washington’s High School
counselors. Harriet has been in education for twenty years. She spent ten years
teaching foreign language at Washington High School. After she earned her Masters in
guidance and counseling, Harriet became a counselor at Washington, and has held this
current position for ten years.

The interview began by asking Harriet if there is any written policy regarding
the identification of at-risk students and the placement of these students in the

alternative program. Harriet reported that she was not aware of any written policy.

52

“We try to identify the students using our D/E report (this report gives the names and
classes of all students receiving either a D or B grade), which is published at the end of
each marking period. But the placement process is sort of fly by the seat of your pants.”
I asked Harriet to describe the referral process.
I normally use the D/E report, but a teacher may come and see me about a
student who is not doing well in class. Next, I’ll contact the student’s other
teachers and have them prepare a progress report. The progress report asks the
teacher to list the student’s strengths, weaknesses, and attendance habits. I then
call the student down to see me. I talk about the student’s grades in middle
school. Then I contact the parents and talk to them about the alternative school.
It’s just a conversation until I fill out the application, if I can get that far.
Harriet reported the biggest challenge in the referral process is convincing the parents
that their child’s placement in the alternative program is necessary for the student’s
success. “It’s a sell job and I’m not real good at selling. I don’t know how much else I
can do. My hands are tied. I can’t make them go there. I tell them all the positives, but
the parents don’t want their kid to be labeled as an altemative-type kid.” Harriet
reported that there is little communication between the counselors at the middle school
and high school regarding the criteria to be use in placing at-risk students in the
alternative program.
Who actually decides whether or not a student is placed in the alternative
program? Harriet responded that the professional should have the power to make the

decision, however the parents and the students make the decision.

53

They have all the cards. It’s not working this way. We (the educators) need to
be able to tell parents your child needs to go. . . . We should be able to say ‘if
you are not doing x, y, 2, then you’ll be attending the alternative program’. We
are setting these kids up for failure.

Harriet reported that the referral and placement process is problematic.

First is the parent’s refusal to place their child in the program. “I think it (the

alternative school) got a bad reputation right from the beginning. When it was

first begun parents would call it the crazy school, the dumb, dumb school.

Second is the failure of the middle school counselors to have convincing

conversations with parents about the importance of academic achievement and

that placement in the program will help their child. Third is time. I feel
stretched so many ways. I want to help every kid, and I think I try to help every
kid, but I’m only one person and when they give me three hundred kids it’s like
putting a band aid on a knife wound. You can’t be there all the time. Some kids
are going to fall through the cracks.

Harriet reported that the school district has a low priority in supporting the
alternative program. “If it was a high priority you’d have a full school, more support,
and a referral process that’s consistent.” I asked Harriet what needs to be done to make
the program successful. “I think we need to make it mandatory that kids in the middle
school who are not successful academically should go directly into the alternative

program. If you are going to leave it the way it is, it’s not going to succeed.”

54

The next interview was with Steve, a counselor at Lincoln High School for nine
years. Prior to becoming a high school counselor, Steve spent time counseling in the
private sector.

Steve reported that he has seen nothing written regarding neither the
identification of at-risk students nor any written policy establishing the alternative
program. Steve talked me through the referral process.

There is no consistent procedure. If parents know about the program and wants

their child to go there they call me, and I refer them to the Dean of Students.

The Dean starts the process of checking grades and attendance. Otherwise, the

Dean starts the initial referral. She checks the D/E report on the ninth graders.

If the student is failing three or more academic classes, I contact the student. I

ask them why they are failing. I go over what the alternative program is and

give the student an application to take home to fill. It’s up to the student and
parent to make an inquiry at the alternative school.

Steve reported the big challenge in the referral process is the stigma attached to
the alternative program. “The kids and parents hear that the alternative program is a
druggie school, that it is a bad school, and that it’s a school for kids who have been to
jail.” Steve further reported that parents and kids believe they have the automatic right
to move up to the high school, despite any academic failures. “There should be
something in writing that defines the placement reasons. How can you expect a middle
school student, who has failed five or six classes, to do well in high school?” Steve
asserts that the school district should be able to tell parents and students that placement

in the alternative school is mandatory.

55

The school district has a low priority in placing students in the alternative
program, Steve reported.

I think we have a number of at-risk students in this district and they need to be

helped. I think we do an okay job, but we have to have better communication

between the middle schools and high schools. We all have to be on the same
page. Student discipline issues have not influenced the referral process. Every
referral I have made has been based on academic issues.

Mary is a counselor at Jefferson Alternative High School. She has been in
education for fifteen years. She began her education as an elementary teacher. After
several years of teaching, she returned to graduate school to earn her Masters degree in
Guidance and Counseling. Mary served an internship as a middle school counselor; she
then moved to the Jefferson Alternative program as the counselor.

Mary was unaware of a written policy or criteria regarding identification of at-
risk students or the referral process. She has worked on a committee comprised of
middle school and high school counselors to look at criteria both for identifying at-risk
students and candidates for the alternative program.

Criteria established by the committee recommending placement in the

alternative program emphasized the student’s lack of academic success in the

middle school, i.e. the student failed half of the academic classes, the student
was not a significant behavioral problem, and the student could benefit from
smaller classes. It was never formally presented to the school board.”

In the referral process, Mary reported teachers are the primary people who make

referrals to counselors. Counselors meet with the students, contact the parents, and

56

discuss the program as an option. “The parents then contact me to set up an
appointment for a visitation. After the parents have visited, I fill out an admission form,
check to make sure the student is not special education certified, and then schedule the
student for classes,” said Mary.

The lack of follow-through by middle school and high school counselors is the
big challenge Mary states. “They (teachers and counselors) don’t buy into the program.
They don’t believe that the program is a legitimate educational program and supportive
of kids.” Mary also believes that there is a breakdown in the communication process.
She relates, “Sometimes the counselors don’t talk to the parents. They leave it up to the
kid. They tell the kid, ‘Hey, you’re failing all your classes you should think about
going to the alternative school.’ They don’t promote our program.” When asked who
makes the decision for placement in the alternative program, Mary stated the decision
for placement is left to the parent. She, along with the other counselors who were
interviewed, reiterated the decision for placement should be made by the professionals;
the community should be more informed, and alternative program is a school for bad
kids is a myth that should be exposed.

Mary asserts the school district has a low priority in supporting the alternative
program. Mary said the district offers no support to the program financially, verbally,
nor physically.

They don’t come to visit the program. They don’t put money into the program

to keep class size low or provide the needed interventions, like social workers

and psychologists. Parents are not given enough information about the program.

We are in a ‘Catch 22’. We are expected to teach the same curriculum, the same

57

bench marks, cover the same material to the students who couldn’t make it in

the regular school.

To make the program stronger and more successful, Mary offers these
suggestions: the administration should back the program, allow teachers more flexibility
in terms of course offerings and course content, and allow the program to be
autonomous in its decision making.

Middle School Counselors

The sixth interview was with Margaret, a counselor at Van Buren Middle
School. Margaret has been an educator for twenty years. She taught language arts in
the middle school, and has counseled students at Van Buren for the past eleven years.

Margaret reported she did not know was what the policy was of the alternative
program. When asked about the written criteria regarding the identification and
placement of at-risk students in the alternative program, Margaret responded:

The criteria was taken from some source, somewhere, and never very well

adapted to our needs. I don’t know anyone in the middle schools that was

involved in this process. The kids I see as qualifying for placement are the ones
that don’t fit in real well to the school environment. They are the hall creepers.

The ones that get lost in the shuffle.

Margaret states the referral process is subjective. She does not follow the
conventional process of checking the student’s grades and attendance. Margaret’s
method is to sit down and make a list of the students she sees repeatedly in her office.

“Sometimes I ask the secretary who she thinks might be a good candidate, because

58

she’s got good instincts. Then I go to the teachers to get information on what the kid is
doing in class.” Margaret stated:

I don’t always refer students at the end of the eighth grade. Some students

should be given the opportunity to prove they can do the work. I prefer to have

the high school counselors start the referral process. I’ll send home information
about the alternative program . . . . But I tell them that nobody can make you go
there, but it’s a good thing to think about.

The challenge in the referral process, reported Margaret, is convincing the
parents that it (placement) is a good option for the student: “I think it’s the perception
of the program. Many of the kids who should go there feel like they are going to miss
out on all the high school activities.” Margaret stated that the perceptions of the parents
are often based on ill-conceived ideas. “We can tell them that it is a good place,” she
said. “Why do they think Jefferson is a drug high school? Is it publicity? An old
reputation? I don’t know.”

Who makes the decision for placement in the program? Margaret responded,
“It’s the parent’s decision. Final decision for placement, should be done by the people
who really know and see the big picture, i.e. the educators” Margaret maintains, but she
also sees a dilemma, “As a parent myself, I wouldn’t want somebody telling me and my
kid where they belong.” When asked the school district’s priority in identifying and
placing at-risk students in the alternative program her response was, “You mean the
people who pay the bills. Low!”

Are student discipline problems a factor influencing the referral process,

Margaret gave an answer that was contradictory to that of other school personnel. “1

59

think they should absolutely be part of the process. Sometimes those kids are discipline
cases because their home life and other things in their lives are so screwed up and
nobody is paying attention to them. Somebody needs to.” The final questions to
Margaret were how successful is the referral process and what if anything could be done
to make the program more successful. Margaret replied,

The process is obviously not working. We are missing the students who kind of

creep around. I don’t know all of the kids assigned to me. If they don’t call

attention to themselves, we miss them. We don’t advocate for them because
they push us too far, and we end up saying ‘let’em go’. The program has to be
full-size and flexible.

Sue, the seventh interview was a counselor at Polk Middle School. Sue’s has
been in education for twenty-five years. Prior to her working as a counselor for the past
fifteen years, Sue taught at the elementary level.

Sue stated that she had seen neither written policy regarding the identification of
at-risk students nor a written policy regarding the placement of at-risk students in the
alternative program. She said,

When I was in the elementary school we started to identify at-risk kids by their

behavior, attendance, and test scores. The only policy I knew when I moved tot

he middle school was that special education students were not eligible for the
alternative program. But this was not written in any policy books, it was just
word of mouth.”

Sue reported the first step in the referral process was to identify who failed the

core classes (language arts, math, science, and social science). The name of the student

60

was placed on a master list. If the student was constantly referred to the office for
behavior problem, the student’s name was eliminated from the list. Sue continued,

Once identified, the student was called to my office and the possibility of

enrolling in the alternative school was discussed. The student is told that they

would be in smaller classes, would take the curriculum at a slower pace, and

would get more one-on-one instruction. At that point I either gave the student a

brochure to take home, or I mailed it to the parents. It was up to the parent

to make contact with the alternative school.

Sue reported that the biggest challenge to the referral process was that it is
harder and harder to identify students who cannot do the work. “Today, there are
students who can’t do the work, and students who won’t do the work (who eventually
will become the future kids who can’t do the work because they have lost the skills).
This has to do with effort and attitude, and it is really hard to measure effort and
attitude.”

What is school district’s priority regarding the identification and placement of
at-risk students in the alternative program. Sue responded,

They don’t see it as a high priority. Discipline issues are a major concern in the

referral process. I have always felt that students enrolled in the alternative

program were going there to really stay on task and earn the necessary credits to
help them graduate on time. If discipline problems are sent to the program, then
the teacher is not going to have the time to provide that one-on-one instruction

promised because time is being spent on handling discipline issues.”

61

Asked if the referral process was working and what could be done to make the

program stronger and more successful, Margaret reported.

We are doing more and more than we’ve ever done before, but it seems that the
more we do in one area then we lose something in another area. I have never
seen any type of evaluation on the program. It would be interesting to see how
many of the students we have sent to the program returned to the regular school
or graduated. What we need is better communication with everyone - - -
teachers, high school counselors, parents and students.”

The last interview was with Jodi a middle school counselor from the Tyler

Middle School. An educator for thirty years, Jodi has taught students in both the

elementary and middle school. Jodi has been a counselor at Tyler for the last fifteen

years.

I asked Jodi about the existence of any written policy regarding the

establishment of the alternative program, the identification of at-risk students, and the

placement process of students in the alternative program. Jodi responded that she had

seen no written policy regarding the identification criteria or the referral process. “We

have an agreement between the middle school counselors that we follow, basically, it’s

not cast in stone,” she answered. I asked Jodi to describe the referral process. Jodi

said:

I don’t see anything wrong with the process other than it needs to have more
teeth in it. . . . I make a list at the end of the semester of the students failing three
or more core classes. I call them down and tell them they need to start thinking

about where they are headed. I send home a letter explaining what the

62

alternative program is all about. I encourage parents to make a visit to the

alternative program. I don’t know if you can do this in public education, but we

need to be able to say ‘your child must go to the alternative program.’
“The challenge to the referral process,” stated Jodi,

It is the pie in the sky belief by parents that their child is going to turn it

(academically) around. It’s the negative perception of the school. I had one

parent think that the alternative school was for pregnant girls. I try to change

this negative perception, but if the perception in the parent’s head is negative
you are neither going to change it nor place their child in the program.

I asked Jodi who makes the actual decision regarding placement in the
alternative program. She reported that it is the parent who makes the final decision: “If
they say ‘no’, its no. They don’t listen to our recommendations. It should be the school
who makes the decision.”

Jodi reported the school district is mediocre in its support for the program. Jodi
explained,

We are doing everything we can here given the parameter in which we work.

We, at least, provide an alternative program. I think we are making progress in

identifying at-risk students, but we are a long way off from being successful in

their placement. To effect change the process we need to have more leverage
from the school district in terms of either putting pressure on parents or just flat
out not giving parents the power.

Interestingly the referral process for placement of at-risk students in the

alternative educational program varies from building to building (high schools and

63

middle schools) and from counselor to counselor. The consensus among the counselors
(both at the high schools and middle schools) is that when a student was identified as
being at-risk using the exception report (the report providing D/E grades) and
attendance patterns, a written brochure about the alternative educational program must
be given to the student to take home for the parents to read. However, more emphasis is
placed on using the exception report at the high schools than at the middle schools.

The consensus of the counselors who were interviewed was that poor grades and
poor attendance were the major factors that influence the referral process. However,
there were some contradictory and conflicting responses. One high school counselor
stated “Grades are the number one indicator, but I’d rather not send a student who is
failing all six classes. This student needs to participate in group counseling.” The
counselors’ caseload, in the regular high school, is 350:1. At the middle school the
counselor’s caseload is 500:1 and in the alternative educational program the counselor’s
caseload is 140:1. With high counselor caseloads, counselors are unlikely to provide
this (group counseling) service, nor to know all of their students and their shortcomings.
Other responses from the counselors regarding factors that influence their decision for
referral included are non-participation in class, lack of parent responsiveness, and lack
of motivation. In general, counselors at both high schools and the three middle schools
agreed that failure to earn credits and failing academic classes are the major factors
influencing placement of at-risk students in the alternative education program.
Inconsistencies arose, however, in actual practice. A middle school counselor reported:

We look at grades at the end of each semester. If a student is failing three or

more academic classes, we use that as our break point. We also look at behavior.

64

However, if the student is failing academic classes but is passing elective
classes, we don’t like to refer him/her to the alternative program. We prefer to
send this student to the regular high school and hope that interest in the elective
area will spark interest in doing better in the academic areas.

A high school counselor reported, “A student failing six classes is not a good
candidate for placement in the alterative program because chances are he/she is not
going to make it no matter where he/she is placed.” .

The counselors and cleans were asked who makes the final decision for
placement in the alternative educational program. Each administrators and each
counselor reported that the final decision for placement in the alternative educational
program is made by the student and/or the parents. Who should make the decision for
placement of the at—risk students in the alternative educational program? Each of the
administrators and counselors responded that the final placement decision should be left
to the educators.

Why are more students not placed in the alternative educational program? The
overall responses from each participant indicate it is the perception of the alternative
program within the community (the school district) that is influential in the placement
decision.

Administrators and the counselors were asked, “What is the main challenge in
identifying and placing at-risk students in the alternative educational program? The
alternative program is negatively perceived by parents and students were the

overwhelming reply.

65

The final two questions asked of the counselors and administrators dealt with the
academic of at-risk students participating in the alternative program. The two questions
asked were: (1) Is the placement process working and (2) what, if any, changes should
be made to improve the placement process.” The majority of the counselors replied that
the current alternative program is not working. “The program needs to be mandatory.
There needs to be some bite in the placement process. There needs to be definite
criteria and it needs to be consistently followed by everyone.” In response to the second
question, again, the counselors were in agreement: “The image of the program needs to
be changed. Parents need to be informed regarding the positive of the program.
Administration must back the program in all aspects, providing support financially.”

Administrators and counselors were given two sets of scenarios designed to
duplicate the process for placing students in an alternative educational program.
Characteristics associated with potential at-risk students included attendance patterns,
academic achievement and general behavior. Participants read each scenario and
recommended student referral or non-referred to the alternative high school program.
Students in Scenario A are fictional students. Students in Scenario B are actual students

attending the traditional high school.

 

Scenario 5. I

(Fictional Student) 1A
John is currently in ninth grade, attending a suburban high school of 1,535 students.
During his seventh grade year, John was absent a total of 39 days. In middle school

he was not a behavioral problem but was sent to administration numerous times for

66

failure to bring the necessary items (textbooks, paper, and pencils) to class and for
failure to submit classroom assignments to his teacher. John failed language arts,
math, science, and social studies. He passed gym and music. During his eighth
grade year, John has was absent from school 29 days. Again, John failed language
arts, math, science, and social studies. He passed art and reading. Teachers report
that John is not a behavior problem. He did no work on assignments when given the
opportunity in class, did not contribute to class discussions, and rarely turned in
homework assignments. During the first quarter (ten weeks) of John’s ninth grade
year he missed 3 days. John had failed language arts, social studies, science and

math by the end of the first quarter (ten weeks).

 

Each of the administrators recommended this student be placed in the alternative
program. Four counselors recommended placement for this student. One counselor did
not recommend placement in the alternative program for this student, and one counselor
did not respond to the scenario. John does meet the unofficial criteria reported by the
school personnel. During his middle school career, he had an excessive number of
absences, had repeated academic failures, and had no behavioral problems. In the
traditional high school setting, John’s attendance has improved; however, he is still
continuing to experience academic failure. Two counselors reported that they would

recommend John for special education evaluation.

 

Scenario 5.2

(Fictional Student) 2A

67

Richard is currently attending a traditional high school housing 1,535 students and
is enrolled in ninth grade. During his eighth grade year, Richard was absent from
school a total of 65 days. He was sent to administration on numerous occasions for
failure to bring the necessary supplies (textbooks, paper, and pencils) to class and
for numerous behavior problems (insubordination, profanity, intimidation, and
refusal to follow classroom rules). Richard was suspended from school a total of 6
times during the 8lh grade. These suspensions were usually for three days or less.
Richard failed language arts, social studies, science, math, and computers. The only
class he passed was gym. At the end of the first quarter (ten weeks) of his 9th grade
year, Richard is failing science and social studies and is receiving a D in language
arts and math. He was sent to administration 3 times for disruptive classroom
behavior. Teachers report that he is intelligent but refuses to complete classroom

assignments.

 

An analysis of this scenario shows that Richard has excessive absences,

behavioral issues, and academic failure while attending in middle school.

Administrators recommended Richard for placement, in the alternative educational

program. Counselors were split in their responses. Half of the counselors recommended

Richard for placement and the other half recommended Richard attend the traditional

high school. According to the criteria used by administrators and counselors for

placement, Richard should not be recommended for placement. He exhibited an

excessive number of absences, academic failure, and behavior problems in middle

school. In high school Richard is failing only two academic classes and continues to be

68

a behavioral problem. Interestingly, three of the counselors did recommend Richard for
placement. They explained that there are reasons for Richard to act out, and placement

in smaller classes would help Richard to improve both in behavior and academics.

 

Scenario 5.3

(Fictional Student) 3A
Rhonda is currently completing her eighth grade year. She attends a suburban
middle school with an enrollment of 1,200 students. Ronda has been absent an
average number of days this year, and is currently failing every academic class. Her
teachers report that she is unmotivated, easily distracted, and spending most of her
classroom time putting on make-up. Her art teacher reports that Rhonda is

extremely talented and is her best student.

 

In this scenario, one administrator and two counselors recommended Rhonda for
placement in the alternative program; three counselors recommended that Rhonda
should not be placed in the alternative program. One administrator and one counselor
did not respond. In reviewing Rhonda’s school experiences, she does not have
attendance problems. She is experiencing academic failure in each of her content
classes and is not focused. Applying the criteria used by the school personnel, Rhonda
would be a good candidate for the alternative program. However, only three of the
school personnel recommended Rhonda for placement. One reason given for not
referring Rhonda to the alternative educational program was that she seemed to attend

school for social reasons. Two counselors recommended that Rhonda enroll in

69

vocational school.

 

Scenario 5.4

(Fictional Student) 4A
Ariana is currently a second year ninth grader. She attends the same high school as
Richard and John. Ariana has earned no credit during her time in high school. She
is defiant and rude in her behavior. Ariana has been suspended for fighting,
possession of drugs, intimidating other students, and insubordination with
administration. Ariana only absences from school came from serving suspension.
When she has completed assignments and turned them in, she has received above
average grades. Teachers report that Ariana does nothing in class except for

sleeping in class, disrupting or confronting other students.

 

In this scenario, two administrators and three counselors recommended no
placement because, “Placing Ariana in the alternative school would only reinforce the
idea that the alternative school is for bad kids.” Two counselors recommended Ariana
for placement because of her repeated pattern of academic failure. She was a second
year ninth grade student and has earned no credits and because she was a behavior
problem.

The students presented in Scenario B were actual students attending the

traditional high school.

 

Scenario 5.5

70

(Actuzi Student) 1B
Jenny is currently in the 9‘h grade. She has failed four of six classes at the end of the
first semester (twenty weeks). She passed math class with a D and health class with
a C. During this first semester she was absent 11.5 days. Approximately ten weeks
into the second semester, she has been absent a total of 3 1/2 days. At the end of
Jenny’s ninth grade school year, her grades rose to three B’s, two C’s and one A. In
middle school she achieved A’s and B’s. In eighth grade, Jenny was absent a total
of twenty-nine (29) days. In seventh grade she was absent a total of twenty-three
(23) days and in 6th grade Jenny was absent a total of eighteen (18) days. Jenny
was sent to administration on three occasions for attendance problems and on one

occasion for inappropriate behavior.

 

An analysis of this scenario shows Jenny was academically successful in middle school,
but she did have problems with her attendance. When she enrolled in high school, her
academic grades dropped, but her attendance improved. Two administrators and four
counselors recommended that Jenny should not be placed in the alternative program

because “she seemed to be turning things (attendance and academic success) around.”

 

Scenario 5.6

(Actual Student) 2B
Gene is currently in ninth grade. In sixth grade he passed his academic core classes
(math, science, social studies, and language arts) with D’s. In seventh grade he

failed language arts, math, and social studies. He passed science with a D. In

71

seventh grade he failed language arts, math and social studies. He passed science
with a C. In eighth grade he failed all of his academic core classes (math, science,
social studies, and language arts). He passed technology, physical education, and
learning strategies. He was absent a total of 10 days during his three years. Gene
has been referred to administration on two occasions for attendance problems.
During his first semester of high school, he failed all of his classes except physical
education (which he passed with a D). Currently, in the second semester, he has
three C’s, one D and two E’s. He has missed a total of 2.5 days in the current

school year.

 

An analysis of this scenario indicates Gene struggled academically in middle school,
though attendance was good. In high school, Gene earned a half credit at the end his
first semester (twenty weeks). He seems to be improving academically. Two
administrators and five counselors recommended that Gene be placed in the alternative
program. Comments, such as, “He is not a behavior problem, and smaller classes would
probably help him,” were representative of their responses. One counselor
recommended that Gene not be placed in the alternative program: “He struggled in
middle school, but he is starting to pass some of his classes. I’d probably recommend

testing for special education”.

 

Scenario 5. 7

(Actual Student) 3B

72

Bob is currently in ninth grade. In sixth grade, seventh grade and eighth grade Bob
passed all of his classes. In sixth grade he was absent 15.5 days; in seventh grade
he was absent 13 days, and in eighth grade he was absent 18 days. Bob was sent to
administration on one occasion for inappropriate behavior.

During his first semester in high school, Bob failed science, math, and marketing.
He passed language arts with a D, physical education with an A and social studies
with a D. In the second semester, Bob is failing language arts, math, and social

studies, and is receiving a D-in science. He has been absent 12 days.

 

In this scenario, Bob had attendance problems in middle school that seem to be carrying
over into his high school career. In addition to attendance problems, Bob is
experiencing academic failure in his first year at high school. School personnel were
split on their recommendations. One administrator and two counselors recommended
Bob for placement in the alternative high school. One administrator and three
counselors recommended that Bob remain in the traditional high school. Explanations
from the school personnel who recommended placement included, “It looks like he is
capable of doing the work (academically) but is a little slower,” and “If he is
struggling, I think the alternative program would help.” Comments from the school
personnel not recommending placement included: “Bob’s problem seems to be related
to attendance,” and “He’s doing okay in his fun classes. This seems like a motivation

problem.”

 

Scenario 5.8

73

(Actual Student) 48
Joe is currently in eighth grade. In sixth grade, Joe passed all of his classes. He was
absent 19 days. In seventh grade he failed language arts, math, and introduction to
foreign language. He earned a D in physical education and a C- in life skills, social
studies, and science. During his seventh grade year, Joe was absent a total of 19.5
days. During the first semester of his eighth grade year, Joe failed science, history,
and language arts. He passed music and math with a D-. He is currently failing all
classes except foreign language (in which he currently has a D-). Joe has been

absent 40 days this school year.

 

An analysis shows Joe is struggling with both academics and has an attendance. Using
the criteria for recommending a student for placement in the alternative program, Joe is
a good candidate. However, the recommendations were split: one administrator and
two counselors recommended Joe for placement in the alternative program, and one
administrator and three counselors did not recommend Joe for placement. Comments
ranged from “I would not recommend him for placement. He definitely has an
attendance problem, but I think he could do the work (academically).” “I would
recommend him for placement. He’s got the ability and he needs to get a good base so
he can graduate.”
Summary

In reviewing the data and the information presented in this chapter, it is evident

that the school personnel could not agree among themselves regarding the criteria for

assigning membership to the alternative high school. Specifically, in the scenarios, one

74

can see how different the interpretations of student information by the school personnel
vary from building to building. in the different buildings not every counselor makes the
same kind of referrals. There were inconsistencies in the counselors’ interpretations of
the situations regarding the advocacy for the client. There were inconsistencies found
in the counselor’s emphasis of academic achievement. One counselor stated, “Grades
are the number one indicator, but I’d rather not send a student who is failing all six
classes.” The school personnel blamed these inconsistencies on the fact that placement
policies were unwritten and not clear. This resulted in repeated examples of the
influence involving multiple actors making differing decisions. School personnel
reported that they gather all of the information that is pertinent for the referral, but
ultimately turned the final decision for placement over to the parents and the students.
The school personnel reported that this decision is influenced by the student’s and
parent’s perspective of the program, i.e., “The community’s perception of the program
is that it is a place for bad kids and kids with drug problems.” “The parents fight the
placement. They don’t see the positives.”

Instead of uniformly applying the selection criteria, the placement decision is
influenced by the personal priorities of the individual decision maker. Each counselor’s
personal interpretation of the student’s ability and actual academic achievement
influences the decision for placement recommendations, which, in turn, accounts for the
opposing recommendations for both the fictitious and actual students in the scenarios.
Client statistics may indicate little about the objective needs of the client population, but

they do reflect the organizations that cater to those needs.

75

Administrators and counselors perceive the referral process is a concept of
unstructured decision making. There is no written policy to be followed. Because there
are no written guidelines, there is no consistency in the way students are referred to the
alternative program. Counselors are unsure about where the students should go. One
counselor stated, “It is a subjective process. Only sometimes will a teacher report a
concern about a student’s lack of academic progress.” Further, the counselor reported
that it is the negative perception of the program that hurts the referral process: “If we
had specific criteria, made the teachers more aware about the alternative program, and
had a lot more PR in the community the alternative program would be more
successful.” Preferences, rules, policy, people, and outcomes are mixed together in
ways that make the interpretation of information uncertain and unclear.

All of this data suggest that the identity and the mission of the alternative high

school have become blurred.

76

CHAPTER 6

The students are a crucial part to this study. As mentioned earlier, two groups of
six male students, all identified as being at-risk, were followed over a four year period
from the 1999/2000 school year, the year the students entered high school, to the
2002/2003 school year, the year the students were to graduate. All students from each
group were recommended for placement in the alternative educational program for the
1999/2000 school year. Group A consists of six students who elected to enroll in
Jefferson Alternative High School, and Group T consists of six students who elected to
enroll in the traditional high school. The data collected on each group of students
covers the following areas: attendance; academic achievement (the number of credits
earned each year during the four year period); time spent studying; graduation results;
current employment status; student participation in school activities; student perceptions
of their education; student sense of community involvement; student desire to continue
education; student involvement with peers (post-graduation); student perceptions of the
reasons for their referral to the alternative program; student perceptions of the
alternative program; and student reflections on his decision for placement. This
information will be presented in the form of mini-cases on each student. The first six
mini-cases are the male students recommended for placement in the alternative
education program but chose to attend the traditional high school program.

Traditional High School Students

 

Walter

77

Walter moved into the school district and enrolled in the seventh grade in the
1996/1997 school year. Walter struggled academically in seventh grade; he earned
mainly C’s and D’s. His attendance was poor. Walter was absent 34.5 days of the 180
required days in seventh grade. In eighth grade, Walter’s attendance improved. He did
not miss any days that year; however, Walter continued to struggle academically. He
failed 3 out of 6 classes and was recommended for placement in the alternative high
school. Though Walter did fit the profile of poor attendance and low academic
achievement, he chose to enroll in the traditional high school for ninth grade, and he
continued to struggle academically. At the end of his freshman year, he had earned
only two credits out of a possible six. His absenteeism continued to be high. He missed
twenty-two days his freshman year. In 2000/2001, Walter began his second year at the
traditional high school. During his second year Walter’s attendance improved as did his
academic success. Walter was truant 14 days and he earned three credits. Walter had
now earned enough credits to be a sophomore. However, Walter was a full year behind
his peers in credits. During the 2001/2002 school year, Walter had perfect attendance
and earned all of his possible credits. At the start of the 2002/2003 school year, which
should have been Walter’s senior year, Walter chose to quit. In his three years
enrollment in the traditional high school, Walter had earned a total of 14.5 credits with a

GPA of 1.57.

 

During our interview, (Two years later) Walter stated that he was living with his
parents. He reported that he was single and was unemployed. When I asked about his

experience in high school, Walter reported that he did not like school and that he did not

78

really study during high school. He reported spending less than one hour per day
working on homework. Walter also reported that he participated in no extra-curricular
or athletic activities. Walter stated he had received a fair but boring education. He said
that his teachers were well prepared to teach the classes, but that they really were not
available for him. Walter reported that he had few friends in high school, and the ones
he did hang with influenced him to skip school. He indicated that he wished he had
worked harder in high school, and he considered he had made the wrong decision
regarding not enrolling in the alternative high school. I asked Walter why he had been
referred to Jefferson Alternative High School: he stated that it was “probably because of
my attendance and failing grades in middle school.” When asked why he did not
choose to enroll in the alternative program, Walter stated that his parents believed it was
a school for bad kids. Walter reported that he was not involved in any community
activities.

Asked if there had been any single event or person who had had a significant impact on
his life while he was in high school, Walter replied “No”. Walter stated that he wished
he had worked harder in high school and had “learned more math.” Did Walter make
the right decision in regard to his choice of enrollment? Walter responded, “No, I

should have gone to the alternative high school.”

 

19112
John moved into the school district at the beginning of his seventh grade year.
John was an average student, academically, in both seventh and eighth grades. His

attendance in middle school was good; he was absent six days in seventh grade and 2.5

79

days in eighth grade. This was puzzling. The criteria for being identified as at-risk are
based on poor attendance and low academic achievement. John fit neither of these two
criteria. John’s transcript indicates he experienced moderate success in the traditional
high school environment. In his freshman year, he earned 5.5 credits (out of six credits)
and was absent three days. In his sophomore year John earned 4.5 credits (out of six
credits) and missed three days. In his junior year, John earned 3.5 credits and did not
miss any school days. In John’s senior year, he took extra classes to make up for his
earlier failures. John earned eight credits that year and did not miss any school. John

graduated with his class in June 2003. His GPA was a 1.41.

 

During our interview, John stated that he was currently living with his mother, is
single, has a part time job, and earns less than $1,000 per month. When asked about his
experience in high school, John reported that he did not participate in extra-curricular or
athletic activities. He said he had received a fair education, but his teachers and the
administration really did not care about him. John also stated that the discipline
administered to students was not fair or equal among the students. He reported that he
did not study during high school, and spent less than one hour per day working on
homework. When asked if there had been any significant event that he remembers from
his high school experience, John responded that he did have one teacher who took an
interest in his life. Why had John been referred? He stated the dean of students in the
high school had recommended he enroll in the alternative high school because of his
failing grades in his freshman year. John also stated that he had been recommended for

placement in the alternative high school by his middle school counselor. He did not

80

choose to enroll in the alternative program because his parents believed it was a school
for druggies and troublemakers. John said he had made the right decision in remaining

in the traditional high school.

 

Daniel

Daniel entered middle school for his sixth grade year where he struggled
academically, failing four of his six classes. Daniel was absent 8.5 days out of 180
schooldays. In seventh grade, Daniel continued to struggle academically, failing three
classes and was absent seven days. In classes where he passed, he earned mostly D’s.
During the first semester of Daniel’s eighth grade year he failed four classes and was
absent four days. In the second semester, Daniel failed three classes and was absent 3
days. Daniel was recommended for placement in the alternative high school, but chose
to attend the traditional high school (he did fit the profile of poor attendance and low
academic achievement). Daniel was not academically successful in his freshman year.
He earned a total of one credit (out of a possible six credits). His attendance was good.
He only missed a total of six days during the entire school year. In Daniel’s second
year in the traditional high school, he demonstrated marked improvement in his
academic achievement. He earned a total of six credits. Although he was still a full
year behind his classmates, Daniel continued to work hard. In his second year, he only
missed six days of school. In Daniel’s third year of high school, he slipped both
academically and in his attendance. Daniel missed 19.5 days during his third year and
only earned 3.5 credits during the school year. At the beginning of Daniel’s fourth year

of high school, he transferred to the alternative high school. During this year Daniel did

81

not miss any school. He was able to make up the credits he lost in his freshman year by
attending after school extra credit classes in addition to attending the alternative high

school during the day. Daniel graduated with his class in 2003 with a 1.53 GPA.

 

During the interview, Daniel stated that he was currently single and living at
home with his mother. He reported that he was unemployed and that he was not
pursuing a post secondary educational program. When asked about his experience in
high school, Daniel reported that he did not participate in extra-curricular or athletic
activities. He said he had received a good education, his teachers were well prepared,
and his teachers and the administration did care and listen to him. Daniel stated that the
discipline administered to students was fair among the students. Daniel saw himself as
having fairly good attendance in high school: “I only missed maybe one or two times a
month”. Daniel also reported that he spent at least one to two hours studying each night
during high school. When asked if there had been any significant event that he
remembered from his high school experience, he responded “Nothing.” Daniel stated
that his counselor at the middle school had recommended he enroll in the alternative
high school because of his poor attendance and academic failures. When asked why he
chose not to enroll in the alternative program, Daniel stated that his dad had told him
that he had gone to the regular high school and that is where he wanted Daniel to go.
Dan stated that he had made the right decision in remaining in the traditional high

school

 

82

Craig entered middle school in the sixth grade. Craig passed all of his classes in
his first year at middle school. However, Craig was absent 21.5 days in sixth grade. In
the seventh grade, Craig’s academic achievement began to slide. During his first
semester he failed two classes. In the second semester he failed five classes. His
attendance did improve in seventh grade; during this year he was absent nine days.
Craig’s eighth grade year was not much better; he failed three of his classes in the first
semester and two in the second semester. Craig was identified as an at-risk student
during his eighth grade year and was recommended for enrollment in the alternative
program by his middle school counselor; Craig fit the profile with poor attendance and
low academic achievement. Craig chose to enroll in the traditional high school for
ninth grade. During this first year Craig earned three credits out of a possible six and
was absent 0.5 day. In his second year as a freshman, Craig earned 5.5 out of six credits
and was absent a total of six days. Craig earned four out of six credits his third year at
the traditional high school and was absent one day. In his fourth year, Craig earned a
total of 5.5 credits out of six and missed five days of school. Craig did graduate with

his class in 2003.

 

During the interview, Craig stated he is single and lives at home with his
parents. He did not work during high school, but he currently has a part time job. Craig
did not share how much he is being paid at his job. Craig is attending community
college. Asked about his experience in high school, Craig reported he had not
participated in extra-curricular or athletic activities. He said he had received a fair, but

boring education, his teachers were well prepared, the teachers and the administration

83

cared for and listened to him, and discipline administered to students was fair. Craig
had fairly good attendance most of the time in high school and spent less than one hour
studying each night. When asked if there had been any significant event that he
remembered from his high school experience, he responded “Nothing.” When asked
why he had been referred to the alternative program, Craig stated that his counselor at
the middle school thought he would do better in school if he were in smaller classes.
Craig did not choose to enroll in the alternative program, because he and his parents
thought it was a school for losers. In looking back, Craig reflected that he should have

enrolled in the alternative high school.

 

Naah

Noah entered middle school in the sixth grade. Noah passed all of his classes in
middle school. Noah’s attendance during his years in middle school was good: in
sixth grade, he was absent three days; in seventh grade, Noah had perfect attendance,
and in eighth grade, he was absent four days. A teacher identified Noah as an at-risk
student during his eighth grade year and recommended enrollment in the alternative
program. No explanation was given to support the referral, and Noah did not fit the
referral profile of poor attendance and low academic achievement. Noah chose to
enroll in the traditional high school for ninth grade. During his first year he earned all
six credits out of a possible six and was absent two days. In his second year, Noah
earned five out of six credits and was absent one day. Noah earned five out of six

credits during his third year at the traditional high school and had perfect attendance. In

84

his fourth year, Noah earned all six of his credits and again had perfect attendance.

Noah did graduate with his class in 2003.

 

At the time of the interview, Noah was single and lived at home with his mother.
He was employed part time and earned less than $1,000 per month. He was not
pursuing any post secondary educational programs. Asked about his experience in high
school, Noah reported he had not participated in extra-curricular or athletic activities.
He had received a good education, his teachers were well prepared, and the teachers and
the administration had cared about him and had and listened to him. Noah stated the
discipline administered to students was fair. He had fairly good attendance in high
school; however, Noah reported spending less than one hour each night studying during
high school. When asked if there had been any significant event that he remembered
from his high school experience, he responded “Nothing.” When asked why he had
been referred and he stated “I don’t know.” When asked why he chose not to enroll in
the alternative program, Noah stated that his dad had told him that if he went to the
alternative high school, he would not get a regular diploma. Noah remarked that he

had made the right decision in remaining in the traditional high school.

 

N_ic_k

Nick entered middle school in the sixth grade. Nick failed three of his six
classes in sixth grade year and was 16.5 days. In seventh grade, Nick failed three
classes of his six classes and was absent 10.5 days. In eighth grade he failed four of his

classes of his six classes and missed twenty-four days of school. A counselor identified

85

Nick as an at-risk student during his eighth grade year and recommended enrollment in
the alternative program. Nick did fit the alternative school profile of poor attendance
and low academic achievement. Nick chose to enroll in the traditional high school for
ninth grade. During his first year Nick earned three out of the six credits possible and
was absent 8.5 days. In his second year, Nick earned four out of six credits and was
absent nineteen days. Nick earned five and a half out of six credits his third year at the
traditional high school and was absent seven days. In his fourth year, Nick earned all
six of his credits and had perfect attendance. Nick also attended night school during his

last year. Nick graduated with his class in 2003.

 

At the time of the interview, Nick was single and lived at home with his mother.
He was neither employed nor pursuing any post secondary educational programs.
When Nick was asked about his high school experiences, Nick related he had not
participated in extra-curricular or athletic activities, he had received a good education,
teachers were well prepared, and teachers and the administration did care for and
listened to him. Nick stated the discipline administered to students was fair. Nick
stated he had good grades in middle school and poor attendance in high school, and
these were two reasons why he had been recommended for the alternative high school.
Nick reported spending at least two or more hours studying each night during high
school. When asked if there had been any significant event that he remembered from
his high school experience, he responded, “Yea, I graduated.” Nick chose to enroll in

the alternative program, because his parents thought it was a place for bad kids and

86

druggies. Nick said he had made the right decision to remaining in the traditional high
school.
Alternative High School Students

The next six mini-cases are drawn from the male students who were
recommended for placement in the alternative education program and who chose to

enroll.

 

m

In 1996/ 1977, William enrolled in the sixth grade. William was moderately
successful in sixth grade. Grades ranged from B’s to D’s, however, attendance was
poor. William was absent 35.5 days. In seventh grade he became less focused
academically. During the first semester he failed one class out of six, and in the second
semester he failed two of his classes. William’s high absenteeism continued; he was
absent forty days in the seventh grade. In eighth grade, William failed three out of his
six classes during the first semester, and in the second semester, he failed four of his six
classes. Again, his attendance was poor. He was absent thirty-four days. William was
recommended for placement in the alternative high school by his middle school
counselor: William did fit the alternative school’s profile of poor attendance and low
academic achievement. William chose to enroll in the alternative high school for ninth
grade. At the end of his freshman year, he had earned four credits out of a possible six
credits. His attendance improved, he missed one day. In 2000/2001, William began his
sophomore year. During the first semester of his second year William earned a total of

2.5 credits. At the end of this first semester, William dropped out of high school.

87

 

At the time of the interview, William was living with his parents, single, and
was unemployed. When asked about his experience in high school, William reported
that he did not participate in any extra-curricular or athletic activities. William
indicated he had received a poor education. He asserted neither administrators nor
teachers cared about the students. William was bored by school and had not studied
during high school; he spent less than thirty minutes per day working on homework.
William said he had no friends in high school. When asked why he had been referred,
he stated his middle school counselor, “Thought my negative attitude might improve.”
William’s parents were concerned about his enrollment in the alternative high school,
because they thought it was a school for bad kids. William said he had made the wrong

choice regarding his enrollment.

 

Christopher

In 1996/1977, Chris enrolled in the sixth grade. Chris was fairly successful in
sixth grade. He earned C’s during the sixth grade; however, he missed nine days. In
seventh grade he was less focused. During the first semester he maintained his C
grades; however, in the second semester he failed four of his six classes. Chris was
absent ten days during the seventh grade. In eighth grade, Chris failed all six of his
classes during the first semester; he failed four of his six classes in the second semester
of his eighth grade. His attendance was poor in eighth grade; he was absent sixteen
days. A friend recommended alternative school to Chris because “My friend thought I

would do better there.” Chris did fit the alternative school’s profile of poor attendance

88

and low academic achievement. Chris chose to enroll in the traditional high school for
ninth grade. He continued to struggle. Chris failed all of his classes. While attendance
was good, he was unsuccessful academically. In the tenth, Chris enrolled in the
alternative high school. Though he experienced some academic failure his grades
began to improved, Chris was able to earn five credits. In eleventh grade, Chris earned
5 .5 credits. He had perfect attendance. In his fourth year at the alternative high school,
Chris earned five credits out of six. Chris did not graduate with his peers in June of

2003. He had earned only eighteen credits.

 

At the time of the interview, Chris was currently with his parents. He was
single, had a part time job, and he was currently earning between $1,000 and $2,000 a
month. Chris said he returned to the traditional high school for the 2003/2004 school
year to earn the missing four credits and to graduate. Christopher did not participate in
any extra-curricular or athletic activities. Chris said he had received a good education,
administrators and teachers listened to him, and discipline administered was fair and
equal for all students. Chris reported he spent about one to two hours a night on his
home work. His friends were supportive. One reason he enrolled in the alternative high
school was because a friend attended who told Chris that he would be more successful
at the alternative high school. Was there a significant event in his high school career?
Chris confided he had been in an automobile accident, and it changed the way he looked
at life. His mom was supportive of his decision to enroll in the alternative school
program. He remarked, “She wanted me to be happy.” Chris stated he made the right

decision by enrolling in the alternative high school. Chris did graduate in 2004.

89

 

lg

In 1996/ 1977, Joe enrolled in the sixth grade. Joe had fair success in sixth
grade. He earned C’s and D’s his first semester. In the second semester he failed four
classes. His attendance was poor. He missed twenty-seven days. In seventh grade his
grades improved; he failed one class. His attendance, however, continued to be a
problem as Joe was absent forty-three days. In eighth grade, Joe failed five classes.
His attendance continued to be a problem. He was absent fifty out of ninety days in
eighth grade. Joe was recommended for placement in the alternative high school by his
middle school counselor. Joe did fit the alternative school’s profile of poor attendance
and low academic achievement. Joe chose to enroll in the alternative high school for
ninth grade. At the end of his freshman year, he had earned one credit out of six credits.
Joe’s attendance began to improve; he missed seven days. In 2000/2001, Joe began his
second year at the alternative high school. During the first semester of his second year,
Joe earned two credits. His attendance habits from middle school returned, and Joe
missed twenty-one days during the first semester. Joe was placed in the juvenile
detention facility for truancy. Joe did not return to the school district and did not

graduate.

 

At the time of the interview, Joe stated he was living on his own, he was single,
and was working full time. He earned between $2,000 and $3,000 a month. When
asked about his experience in high school, Joe reported he participated in no extra-

curricular or athletic activities. Joe received a fair education. He said both

90

administrators and teachers listened to him, and school discipline was fair and equal for
students. Joe said he studied little during high school, less than one hour per day

. working on homework. Joe was referred to the alternative high school by his middle
school counselor because of his attendance problems. Joe’s dad did not want Joe to
attend the alternative high school, but Joe also stated that his dad did not have a clue
about the school. Joe stated that he would have had more success had stayed in the

regular high school.

 

m

In 1996/1977, Adam enrolled in the sixth grade. Adam was successful in sixth
grade and passed each of his six classes. His attendance was also acceptable. Adam
missed 2.5 days. In seventh grade he began to slip academically. He failed four of six
classes. Attendance in the seventh grade remained good; he missed six days. In eighth
grade, Adam lost all focus. He failed five of his six classes. His attendance remained
acceptable. He missed eight days that year. Some of his eighth grade teachers and his
middle school counselor recommended Adam for placement in the alternative high
school because of his academic failure. Adam fit the alternative school’s profile of poor
attendance and low academicachievement. Adam chose to enroll in the alternative high
school for ninth grade, where Adam’s academic struggle began to improve. At the end
of his freshman year, he had earned six out of six credits. He was absent eight days. In
2000/2001, Adam began his sophomore year. During his second year Adam again
earned six of his six credits. He was absent thirteen days during the school year. In his

third year, Adam earned five out of six credits and was absent eight days. In his fourth

91

year at the alternative high school Adam earned five out of six credits and missed only

four days of school. Adam graduated with his peers.

 

At the time of the interview, Adam was currently living with his parents. He
was single and unemployed. Adam participated in no extra-cunicular or athletic
activities. Adam said he had received a good education. Both administrators and
teachers listened to him. Adam studied during high school and spent about one to two
hours per day working on homework. Adam was referred because he had been
unsuccessful in middle school. His parents did not want him to attend the alternative
high school, but Adam reported “I knew it would be better for me if I wanted to

graduate.” Adam was pleased with his decision to enroll in the alternative program.

 

1af_f

In 1996/ 1997, Jeff enrolled in the sixth grade. Jeff had fair success in sixth
grade. He passed six of his six classes his first semester, but failed three of his classes
the second semester. Jeff’s attendance in the sixth grade was poor. He missed thirty
days that year. In seventh grade he became less focused. During the first semester he
failed three of his six classes and in the second semester he failed five of his six classes.
Jeff was absent eleven days during the seventh grade. In eighth grade, Jeff failed four
out of his six classes during the first semester. In the second semester of his eighth
grade, Jeff failed four more of his six classes. His attendance was poor in eighth grade.
He was absent twenty days. Because of poor grades, Jeff was recommended for

placement in the alternative high school by his middle school counselor. Jeff fit the

92

alternative school’s profile of poor attendance and low academic achievement. Though
Jeff chose to enroll in the alternative high school for ninth grade, his academic struggle
did not improve. At the end of his freshman year, Jeff had earned two and a half credits
out of a possible six credits. He missed twenty-nine days his freshman year. In
2000/2001, Jeff began his sophomore year. During his second year Jeff earned a total
of two credits out of a possible six credits. He was absent fifteen days during the school

year. In 2001/2002, Jeff left school. He did not graduate.

 

At the time of the interview, Jeff stated he was living with his mother. He was
single and unemployed. When asked about his experience in high school, Jeff said that
he had not participated in any extra-curricular or athletic activities. Jeff was not sure
how he would rate his education. He said both administrators and teachers were fair
and listened to him. He studied little during high school, spending less than thirty
minutes per day working on homework. When asked why he had been referred to the
alternative high school and he said that his middle school counselor thought Jeff would
have more academic success in high school if Jeff was in smaller classes. Jeff said, “my
mom was willing to try anything in order to get me to pass.” Jeff was unsure if he had
made the right decision.

Attendance

A major factor influencing the identification of at-risk students is attendance.
Students selected for this study experienced from little to severe attendance problems
during their middle school and high school years. During the 1998/1999 school year

when they were in eighth grade, five of the twelve male students experienced fewer

93

than ten absences each. Seven of the twelve male students experienced more than
fifteen absences during this same 1998/ 1999 school year. Over the four year period
studied, student attendance patterns fluctuated. In the traditional high school, five of the
six students experienced a decrease in the number of days he was absent each year. The
sixth student experienced an increase in the number of school days absent. In the
alternative high school, two of the six students experienced a decrease in the number of
days absent. Three of the students experienced an increase in the number of days they
missed school each year, and one student ended up dropping out.
Aiademic Achievement/Graduation

The second major factor in the identification and placement of at-risk students in
the alternative program is academic achievement. As mentioned earlier, the student
grade status is based on the accumulation of credits within a given school year. The
student has the opportunity to earn six credits per given school year. To graduate, a
total of twenty-two credits must be earned during the four year period. The following

information is a breakdown of grade standings in both the traditional and alternative

high schools:
0 - 5 credits freshman
6 — 11 credits sophomore
l2 — 16 credits junior
17 — 22 credits senior

In the middle school, students are not required to earn credits nor are they

retained for academic failure.

94

During the four year period studied, five of the six students enrolled in the
traditional high school earned the required twenty-two credits and graduated. One
student in the traditional high school failed to earn the required twenty—two credits.
This student did not graduate. During this same four year period, one student enrolled
in the alternative high school earned the required twenty-two credits and graduated.
Two of the six students withdrew from school at the beginning of their third year. Two
students completed the four years but did not earn enough of the required credits to
graduate. Graduation rate of the students enrolled in the traditional high school was
83.3 %. Graduation rate of the students enrolled in the alternative high school was
16.66%.

Attention to Study Time

The students in each group were asked to reflect on the amount of time spent
studying each day, during high school. Four students (one from the traditional high
school and three from the alternative high school) reported spending less than thirty
minutes per day studying. Of these four, one student (in the traditional high school)
graduated. Five of the twelve students reported studying less than one hour per day
(four students were in the traditional high school, and one student was in the alternative
high school). Of the four students in the traditional high school, three graduated in the
four year study period, and one did not graduate. One student enrolled in the alternative
high school did not graduate. Three of the students (one student from the traditional
high school and two students from the alternative high school) reported studying
between one to two hours per day. Of these three students, one student from the

alternative high school, and one student from the traditional high school graduated, the

95

second student (from the alternative high school) did not graduate. One student
(alternative high school) reported studying more than two hours per day. This student
did graduate.

The students in each group were asked if they planned to continue their
educational status. Of the group attending the traditional high school, three of the
students who graduated were currently enrolled in a post-high school educational
program. Two of the graduated students from the traditional high school were not
enrolled in any educational program. The remaining student did not graduate and were
not enrolled in any educational program. Of the group of students attending the
alternative high school, two students were currently enrolled in educational programs.
One student had graduated and was enrolled in community college. One student did not
graduate, but had re-enrolled in the traditional high school to complete his education
and graduate. The other four students from the alternative high school were not
enrolled in an educational program.

Extra Curricular Activities

The students in each group were also asked about their involvement in extra-
curricular activities during high school. No students in either group participated in any
extra-curricular school activity. One of the students who attended the alternative high
school responded, “Man, we did not have any after school activities.” A few of the
students from each group indicated they had attended some of the traditional high
school’s football games. However, they indicated that this was to be with friends. It
should be noted that the alternative high school had no any athletic team or club. The

student who wanted to participate in any of these activities was allowed to return to

96

their home high school for participation. It is also noted that none of the twelve males
participated in any athletic or club activity.
Peer Relationships

Students were asked whether friends attended the alternative high school. Five
of the students who elected to enroll in the traditional high school responded “No”. One
student from this group had a friend attending the alternative high school. Of the six
students enrolled in the alternative high school, four responded that they had a friend(s)
attending the alternative program. Two students responded they knew no one attending
the alternative program prior to their enrollment.

As a follow-up question, the students were asked “What did your friend think
about the alternative school?” Responses were mixed. Four students (two from the
alternative high school and two from the traditional high school) reported a friend who
said, “The school (alternative) was a lot easier and had smaller classes.” Two students
responded, “I don’t know.” One student from the alternative program reported that his
friends “wanted me to go there because they went there.” There is an interesting side
note regarding the fiiends of these twelve students, all the students reported their friends
graduated from high school.

Community Involvement

One goal written into the mission statement of the Brown School District is to
produce contributing citizens for the community. After the 2003 graduation year, each
of the twelve students were asked if they were involved in activities, such as volunteer
work, interested in local politics, or informed concerning community events (via

newspaper). Ten of the twelve students (six from the traditional high school and four

97

from the alternative high school) responded “No”. Two students, both from the
alternative high school, responded they were somewhat involved in community
activities (volunteer work).

Referrals

The last three categories are significant to this study: they tell (1) the reason for
their referral; (2) the person(s) who recommended the student for enrollment in the
alternative high school, and (3) the student response regarding enrollment in the
selected school of choice. Eight of the twelve students were recommended to attend the
alternative high school by a middle school counselor. One student indicated his friend
had recommended the alternative high school. Two students were recommended by a
high school dean of students, and one student was recommended by his teacher. In this
research a list of eighty students collected from the three middle schools were
recommended for enrollment at the alternative high school. Names of the twelve
students participating in this study came from the list generated by the middle school
counselors.

Six of the twelve students had been recommended for the alternative high school
because of failing grades in middle school. Two students said the counselor indicated
they would do better academically if they were in smaller size classrooms. One student
had no idea why he was recommended. One student was recommended because he had
a poor attitude towards school. Two students were recommended because of poor
attendance.

Decisions

98

The final question asked of each student was “”Was your decision to attend the
school of your choice, the right one for you?” From the group attending the traditional
high school, four students responded, “No”. Two students responded, “Yes”. It is
interesting to note that three students who responded “No” did graduate. The fourth
student responding, “No” did not graduate. The two students who responded, “Yes”
graduated. In the group attending the alternative high school, four students responded,
“No”. These four students did not graduate in the four year period. Two of the students
responded “Yes”. One did graduate within the four year period. The second student
did not graduate within the four year period; however, he did graduate in 2004.
Decision Reasoning

The fourth question raised in this study was, “What explains why some students
choose to enroll or choose not to enroll in the alternative educational program?” To
obtain information regarding this question, the students were asked what factors
influenced the decision to attend or not to attend the alternative program? Student
answers were varied. The students who chose to attend the alternative program
responded that the idea of smaller classes and more individualized help influenced their
decision.

0 “My grades were slipping, and there were too many kids in my
classes.”
0 “My grades were really bad, and my brother was going there (the
alternative program), and he was doing well.”
The students who choose not to attend the alternative program responded:

o “I did not want to miss stuff going on in the high school.”

99

0 “I had more choices at the regular high school.”
0 “My friends told me not to go because of all the fights that
occurred.”
0 “I wouldn’t be able to be with all my friends.”
Factors Influencing High School Years

Each groups said they had nothing they wanted to learn in high school. When
each group was asked to tell what the most significant event was for them in high
school, the majority (over 66%) reported there was no significant event in high school.
Three students responded with a significant event reported these three things as
significant for them: graduation, being drunk and having a car accident, and having two
teachers who cared about him.

Each group was asked what changes would he make to the high school and the
high school experiences, more than 66% reported they had no suggestions. Of the four
who responded, two in the traditional program said they would have tried harder, and in
the alternative program group, one said he would have tried harder, and the other one
said he would have increased break time. When asked to tell what was remembered
most about high school, four in the traditional program said no memory; the other two
said they wished they had tried harder. In the alternative program group, three had no
memories; two had memories of their friends, and one remembered high school being
fun.

Each group of males was also asked whether there had been a significant person
in his life who influenced his high school years. Five from the traditional group reported

there had been no significant person of influence; one reported having an influential

100

teacher. Two students from the alternative program reported an alternative program
teacher had influenced them; one student reported a traditional program teacher had
influenced him; two students reported no influential person, and one reported his best
friend had been the most significant person in high school.

Each student was asked, “Who made the decision to attend either the alternative
school or the traditional school?” Each student, in each group responded he either they
made the decision or his parent made the decision. When asked, “Did your parents
influence the decision whether to attend the alternative program?” Five students
reported “Yes” the parents did influence the final decision. One student reported his
parents did not influence the final decision. One student reported his parent “did not
really care, as long as I was getting good grades.” Some responses indicate the parents’
perceptions of the alternative educational program influenced the final decision for
enrollment. A phenomenon is evident in the placement of at-risk students in the
alternative educational program, a phenomenon that is potentially feeding a vicious
circle. This phenomenon deals with the concept of stigma. The stigma relates to the
individual and to the organization, i.e. namely, the stigma attached to the alternative
educational program. Stigma is a negative perception of an individual or an
organization. The perceptions pf stigma is often influenced by myths, stereotypes,
prejudices, and values. Stigma is manifested in the perceptions of the parents to
influence their children on the choice of educational placement, the perceptions of
counselors and teachers who recommend placement, and the perceptions of the at-risk
student placed in the alternative educational program. This perception of stigma creates

a disjuncture between the manifest mission of the school district to serve its population

101

and the perception that the alternative educational program is the least favorable, the
least popular school of choice in the school district, and the least possible chance of
fulfilling that.

In a talked with a father of a student who participated in the study, the father
was asked why his son had chosen not to attend the alternative program. “We wanted
him to take responsibility for his poor grades and poor judgment. We did not want the
stigma placed on him that he was going to a special school.”

Students who did not enroll in the alternative program reported answers similar
to those reported by the administrators and counselors: “My parents did not want me to

,9

go to a school full of druggies. “I wanted to be with my friends at the regular high
school.” “My parents heard about all the bad kids that went there (the alternative
program)” “I did not want to miss out on all the stuff that goes on in the high school.”

The final question asked of each groups was, “Was your decision to attend or
not attend the alternative program a good decision?” Each student who enrolled in the
alternative educational program stated the decision to enroll was a positive one. Each
student who had chosen not to enroll responded he had made a mistake in remaining at
the regular high school.

One student reported, “My dad did not want me to go there (to the alternative
program). He did not know anything about the program. He just wanted me to go to the
regular high school and graduate.” Another student stated, “My parents did not want
me to go. My dad thought it would be like getting a GED.” Another student stated,

“My parents had heard a bunch of bad stuff about the school (the alternative program)

that it was full of druggies.”

102

Summary

There were many inconsistencies found regarding decisions made by the
counselors in recommending students for placement in the alternative high school based
on attendance in the eighth grade. Five of the twelve students had less than ten
absences during the entire eighth grade year. Seven of the recommended students had
more that fifteen absences during their eighth grade year. Each of the counselors stated,
as reported in Chapter Five, absenteeism was a primary factor influencing the decision
to recommend students for placement in the alternative educational program.

Each group of students attendance patterns were followed over the four year
period and it was found to be an even split. Fifty percent of the students in each group
experienced more than thirty absences, and fifty percent of the students experienced less
than twenty absences.

The second major criterion for recommending students for placement in the
alternative program is academic achievement. Based on the recommendations from
eighth grade, records of the twelve students who participated in the study, five failed
three or more classes each semester, one student failed no academic classes, and the
remaining six students failed three or more academic classes. There are inconsistencies
in the criteria used by the school personnel in their recommendations. During their high
school careers, the data shows the students attending the traditional high school
experienced more consistency in earning credit than did the students enrolled in the
alternative high school. The data reveals students enrolled in the traditional high school

graduated at a higher rate than the students enrolled in the alternative high school. Five

103

of the six students in the traditional high school graduated within the four year period.
One of the six students in the alternative high school graduated in the four year period.

Reported study habits of the students indicate the majority of the students in
each group studied less than one hour per day. Students reported little if any
involvement in extra-curricular activities. This is an important finding. In Chapter
Two, research reports involvement in extra-curricular activities is vital for students to
establish a connection to the school. This connection signals a feeling in school
ownership. When students are not actively involved in after school activities, there is
less chance academic success will be evident.

Students reported they were not actively involved in community activities after
completion of their four year educational career. This is opposite to the goal or mission
statement of the school district to become a contributing member of the community.
The student’s perception is this is not a priority.

Student perceptions are at the heart of this study. Each student was questioned
about his perceptions: (1) why was he referred for placement in the alternative program
(2) what factors influenced decisions for his placement (3) was his decision a benefit or
a deterrent to his academic success. Reasons for referral ranged from academic failure
in the middle school to poor attendance in the eighth grade. One student said he was
referred because of behavioral issues in the middle school. Students who attended the
traditional high school chose to enroll in the traditional school because the alternative
program was a place for losers. Students who attended the alternative program said

even though the program had a negative image, they chose to enroll because the smaller

104

class sizes would help them, or their poor grades influenced their decision, or they had a
sibling attending the alternative program.

The referral and recommendation processes were definitely influenced by
ambiguity, inconsistencies, the interactions and relationships between the multiple
actors involved, and the negative perception (stigma) of the alternative program by
school personnel, parents, and the students themselves.

Perceptions by the students of their educational outcomes were mixed. Students
enrolled in the alternative program responded positively: they had made the right choice
in attending the alternative high school. Of interest is that only one of the six students
attending the alternative high school graduated within the studied four year period.
Responses of the students enrolled in the traditional high school were mixed. Half of
the students had a positive perception of his high school experiences and half perceived
his experiences though not negative but rather as non-committal. Commonalities
among these students included the following:

0 Each of the twelve students agrees that extra curricular activities
are an important part in keeping children in school. However,
each of the students stated that he did not participate in extra
curricular activities or athletic activities

0 Each of the students is currently single

0 Each of the students with the exception of one, lived with one or
both parents after schooling

0 Ten out of the twelve students stated that the teachers and

administration cared about them and listened to them

105

0 Six out of the twelve students are continuing their education.
Three of the six continue to work on obtaining their high school
diploma

0 Four of the six at-risk students enrolled in the traditional high
school said they had made the right decision regarding their
enrollment. Two of the students stated they should have enrolled
in the alternative high school. One of the two students failed to
graduate.

0 Opinions on the placement decision were divided among the six
alternative high school students. Three of the six students felt he
had made the right decision, two students said he would have
done better if he had enrolled in the traditional high school; one
student offered no opinion.

In looking at student outcomes, the data reveal that it did make a
difference for the students who chose to enroll in the alternative high school.
One student out the six enrolled in the alternative school graduated on time.
Five of the six enrolled in the traditional school graduated on time. Why did this
happen? The historical development of the alternative program and the changes
to the program’s design may have been factors. What is evident from the data is
that attending the alternative high school did make a difference in the students’

educational experiences and outcomes.

106

CHAPTER 7

This chapter will discuss the ideas that explain or influence the fate of this
alternative high school. Powell et a1. (1985), Lipsky (1980), and Goffman (1963)
provide insight into the creation and sustainability of the alternative high school. Three
explanatory trajectories were selected because the issues they incorporate influence the
institutional history, the organizational process, and the client-centered experiences.
The Shopping Mall High School

To attempt to entice and graduate the entire population, and ensure
that most are somehow better for it, is a monumental and exhausting
task. Powell, 1985

Shopping Mall High School (Powell et.al., 1985) provides an interesting
perspective on the development of the alternative educational program. Powell and
colleagues report that between 1900 and 1940 attendance in secondary education
boomed. This was chiefly because economic alternatives to education diminished.
Changes in the structure of industry and technology reduced the number of unskilled
jobs adolescent had filled. Laws were passed that effectively closed a youth out of the
job market in manufacturing. Gradually firms and industries raised the entry level
education requirements for jobs. Students began attending high school because more
education was believed to be an advantage for job security. Educational organizations
felt it necessary to expand and to accommodate the diversity found among adolescent
high school students. Powell reports that one solution was to create the opportunity to
provide all students with choices that would fit their needs, much like how a shopping

mall offers a myriad of choices to customers to provide for and to satisfy their diverse

107

needs. By making numerous and different accommodations to its students, education
would be able to achieve the results everyone desired: a high school diploma. The
accommodations are so varied and numerous because students vary enormously.
According to Powell, the variations and accommodations are provided to meet the
needs of the alienated, the passive, the motivated and unmotivated, the preppy and poor,
and the gifted and the handicapped.

According to Powell, the shopping mall high school contains four elements.
These four elements are not all found together but rather make-up the framework of
secondary educational programs. The make-up of the horizontal curriculum consists of
variety in course offerings. For example, the studied alternative high school offered:
history of the wild, wild, west, Star Wars, and DTE job shadowing. The variety came
in taking traditional classes and giving them a twist. The vertical cuniculum’s
designating characteristic is in the difficulty of the courses. This curriculum is usually
identified with advance placement classes and tracks. The third element embraces
offerings in clubs, athletics, and performing arts which together form the extracurricular
curriculum. Finally, the shopping mall concept offers accommodations that come under
the umbrella of the services curriculum. Providing an alternative educational program
is seen as a means to other educational ends. The programs here are limited only by the
possible problems, for each problem conveys a need for a program.

An important consideration, when variety exists in the afore-mentioned
curriculums, is how choices are made. The power resides in the hands of the customers.
For example, in the case of a student enrolling in the alternative educational program,

the philosophy behind making the choice is that the opportunity is there if the student is

108

willing and able to take advantage of it. In this system, the burden of choice falls
mainly on the student; the choices the students make are shaped by how they, and
sometimes their parents and peers, view the program. The perception by the student
and parents is often a negative view. Choice is also influenced by the importance of
being with acquaintances in as well as outside class. Powell reports (pg. 440) the
student’s self perception dramatically affects choice. Sometimes friendships and self
perceptions work together causing students to stick with those they regard as their own
kind. Powell also reports that many parents play a far more aggressive role in choice.
Many times parents who lack a high school or post—secondary education are not
involved with their child’s educational process. Powell asks how schools attempt to
engage students. How do they educate students about making wise choices? The most
important resource schools have is the guidance counselor. Advising students is
regarded as a specialized professional function of counselors. The counselor’s role in
advising students about enrollment in alternative educational program is a primary
responsibility. However, Powell reports that often the help received from counselors is
minimal. Most perceptions are that student advising is dominated by the logistics of
scheduling and meeting graduation requirements. Many times, investigating various
educational programs or offerings was up to the parents “to become educated on how to
use the resources within the school by taking the initiative themselves in contacting
some of the people here” (Powell pg. 48.) For example, this is what is reported often
happening when counselors would tell parents about the alternative high school, but
then leaves it up to the parents to follow through for further information. In general, the

reach is from the student to the school rather than the school to the student. One reason

109

for this is the student/teacher ratio. A typical ratio runs about 420:1. With such high
caseloads, it is difficult to provide the one-on-one attention needed to meet the needs of
all students. This could be a reason why placement in the appropriate educational
program is so difficult. Counselors complain that about seventy-five percent of their
time is spent on record keeping.

In order to deal with meeting the needs of all the students, school districts have
established the specialty school (Powell et. al., 1985), “The character of the student’s
school experience tends to differ from that of students who make fewer demands or
have neither the abilities nor the disabilities to make them stand out” (Powell pg.119).
In these selective programs the students are different in one important respect: for them,
school has not been a winning experience. They are the students who have not really
learned to cope. Many students are troubled, depressed, and sometimes self-destructive.
These troubled students are those who cannot or will not agree to even the most
undemanding high school accommodations. According to Powell, the students who are
placed in the alternative specialty school are the students who create the most problems.
These problem students experience academic failure and truancy issues. The largest
and most exasperating group of trouble makers consists of the chronic truants, who drop
in and out of school. Many of these are the students who attend school but drop in and
out of classes because “They like conring to school and meeting their friends, but don’t
like the regimented routine of classes and assignments” (Powell, pg. 142). The
alternative program was started for these students who seem to need more structure and
attention. The idea was to make it harder for them to cut classes or cause a stir and

vanish into the great anonymous mass in the school. This was accomplished by making

110

the class sizes smaller than those found in the traditional high school. In the traditional
high school, class size averages between thirty and thirty-five students. In the specialty
school, class size averages range between twelve and fifteen. A strong reason for
investment in the specialty school is that state funding practices are based on average
daily attendance, which creates a strong incentive for schools to keep attendance up.
Another reason is the tight link between attendance and academic achievement, which
is in turn associated with school retention.

Specialty schools usually serve very particular student constituencies, who are
distinguished by special characteristics. For example, in the alternative program those
characteristics are truancy and academic failure. There are usually a number of threads
running through the specialty school. These threads help explain how the school
became designated as special and how the high school experience is shaped as a result.

One of these threads is advocacy. This relates to the influences of individuals
who are supportive or who have a negative perspective. A second thread is that all
specialty schools have an admissions process of some sort. The admissions process can
be very clear-cut or at times mystifying, as not everyone qualifies. A third thread
reflects what the specialty school does not offer. The range of choices within them
tends to be restrictive. For example, in the alternative program the curriculum tends to
be focused on the academic side. Course offerings are geared to help the at-risk student
make—up for academic failure experienced in the traditional school. The course
offerings may vary the approach in the delivery of content in traditional course
offerings, in order to meet the interests of the students, For example, one alternative

school in this study offered the History of the Wild West in place of the traditional U. S.

111

History, and Star Wars in place of government. But not all students are equally
committed or take advantage of the school’s willingness to provide alternative
opportunities. Under circumstances of unequal will or ability, the specialty schools are
the natural outgrowth of the desire of some clients or their representatives to obtain
what they want (Powell, pg.144).

Why do some students and parents accept the recommendation for enrollment
when others do not? The answer lies in providing students and parents with enough
information to make informed choices. Some parents do not want their child enrolled in
an alternative educational program for several reasons: instruction may be inferior, or
the child may not receive a genuine diploma. Others parents want their child to attend
the same school the parents attended, for the child to be considered successful.

How does the admission process work? Who gets in? In most cases, based on
objective data or on some combination of data and the opinions of staff, the student is
found to have special characteristics or to meet specific criteria required for enrollment.
However, the ultimate decision for placement must be accompanied by a willingness of
the participant to agree to the terms of the program. All admissions to specialty schools
generate discontent. Some students do not like the constraints imposed by the program
and avoid membership by choosing not to enroll or by dropping out. Being part of a
specialty school often keeps the students from participating in the many courses and
extra curricular activities found in the traditional high school. The at-risk students find
their choices restricted in ways that indicate they are different from other students.
Most school districts do not mandate enrollment in the alternative programs, but as an

implicit condition of continued membership in the school district, the at-risk student is

112

persuaded to enter the program. In some school districts this is the student’s last
chance. An at-risk student often views this placement as limiting their choices; courses
and teachers are selected for them where structure and supervision are highly
controlled.

One effect of the constraints on choice is that the specialty school offers a more
likely possibility of graduation than does continuation in the traditional school.
Restrictions protect the student from the temptations that come with the ability to make
choices and to prevent them from leaving school empty-handed. The specialty school
constraints are designed to encourage achievement. They provide students with a
coherent and useful education, one that leaves them prepared for what follows high
school (Powell, 1985).

The correlate of less choice for those in the specialty school is that they receive
more attention from school staff. Lower student/teacher ratios make this possible.
Providing counseling to the students is a central feature. The counselor/student ratio is
much smaller at 150:1, as opposed to that found in the traditional high school. The
personal investment of the specialty school teacher in her students usually takes the
form of some special attention.

The specialty school has potent advocates working to insure that the school
provides services to its students, including guidance counselors, administration, parents
and students. Parental support can be both positive and negative. If parents receive
accurate information regarding the purpose of the specialty school, they are more likely
to support the program, then enrollment is likely to be positive. If parental perception

of the program is that their child will be stigmatized, enrollment will not occur. This is

113

also true of the student perceptions and influences whether the student continues in the
program. Teachers and administration can also be powerful advocates for the specialty
school. If these two groups feel an affinity for the program and what it teaches or the
type of student it services, then support is positive. Administrative support can affect
teacher assignments, the number and types of courses offered, and the actual assignment
of students. Community support is important to the acceptance of the program. In
many cases it is the community-at-large that acts as a positive or negative advocate.

The advocacy of the program changes dramatically if there is a negative stigma
attached to the program. Truants and troublemakers lack advocates who approve of
their behavior, but who will lobby for these students to be sent to the alternative school.
At the very least, the school serves as a place where these students can continue their
education in an environment that is separate and safe, away from influencing the
mainstream students with their unacceptable behavior and lack of interest.

In the 1980’s, the school district established its alternative high school with
several goals in mind: provide an educational environment that would maximize the
power the school has to retain the student in the environment, to increase graduation
rates, and provide a multitude of choices and accommodations to the students.
Educators as Street-Level Bureaucrats

The decisions of street level bureaucrats, the routines they establish, and the

devices they invent to cope with uncertainties and work pressures, effectively

become the public policies they carry out.

Michael Lipsky, 1980

114

Lipsky’s theory of street-level bureaucracy deals with how the actions of
organizations’ influence the behaviors of individuals and workers. He refers to public
service organizations as “Street-Level Bureaucracy”. He points out that the street-level
bureaucrats who make the everyday decisions and who run the operations of
organizations are confronted by issues of organizational restrictions, constraints, and
performance measures. The constraints faced by the street-level bureaucrats include
limited or inadequate resources, political issues, and client interactions.

Who are street-level bureaucrats? Lipsky defines them as public service
workers who interact directly with individuals in the course of their jobs and have
substantial discretion in the execution of their work. Examples of street-level
bureaucrats in the educational organization include teachers, counselors, administrators,
and social workers. They determine the eligibility of clients for benefits and services
provided by organizations and programs and have considerable discretion in
determining the nature, amount, and quality of benefits and sanctions provided by their
agencies. For example, in education school personnel decide who will be suspended,
who will remain in school, who will be recommended for placement in the alternative
educational program, who will remain in the traditional educational program, and the
subtle decision of who is teachable. Street-level bureaucrats have different priorities
from those of management. The street-level bureaucrat is interested in processing work
consistent with their preferences and the interests of their clients. The organization, on
the other hand, is interested in processing work in ways that are result-oriented. The
organization is concerned with performance that exposes them to critical scrutiny. The

managers are interested in achieving results consistent with agency objectives. The

115

street-level bureaucrats are constantly torn by the demands of the organization and their
clients to provide effectiveness and responsiveness to their needs. One way in which the
interests of the street level bureaucrats (in the case of this study it is the counselors and
school administrators in each referring building) depart from those of managers (the
school district) is their need to process work loads effectively and efficiently. The fact
that street level bureaucrats must exercise discretion in processing the clients with
inadequate resources means that they must develop shortcuts and simplifications. For
street-level bureaucrats; high caseloads, episodic encounters, and constant pressure for
immediate decisions force them to act without being able to consider whether an
investment in searching for more information would be profitable (Lipsky, 1980). The
street-level bureaucrat faces decision making with preconceived notions, stereotypes,
prejudices, interpretations, and beliefs in existing myth that affect the decisions they
make. When policy is developed through the growth of low-level decisions regarding
routines and categories, those dimensions effectively determine policy within the
parameters established by management. These street-level routines and simplifications
often become the policies that are delivered. For example, the teacher’s informal
classification of students by attributed academic achievement effectively determines
school stratification policies. Interactions become routine when work consists of
decisions made about people during the interaction itself. Routines and simplifications
are subject to biases. Some teachers may be oriented toward fulfilling the
organization’s objectives, but also structured to aid the street-level bureaucrats job

responsibilities that, in turn, may conflict with the organizations’ demands. Routines

116

and simplifications are also subject to the bureaucrats’ occupational and personal biases,
which include prejudices and stereotypes (Lipsky, 1980).

A key issue influencing the street-level bureaucrat’s decision making process is
the availability of resources. Limited or inadequate resources facing street-level
bureaucrats include both time and money available to run the organization and provide
services to clients. In educational organizations, the goals and missions are established
by the management (the school board and central office administrators). Building
administrators, counselors, and teaching staff are the street level bureaucrats responsible
for making the daily decisions to meet the goals of the school district. The school
personnel of each individual building seek to meet the demands and needs of the
students but are torn by the restrictions and limitations imposed by federal mandates,
state funding for education, imposed by policy and guidelines established by state
departments of education, and policy established by school boards and central office
personnel in their role of operating the entire school district.

Time availability resources trap the street-level bureaucrats between an
overbearing workload and a paucity of time and energy for attending to the needs of
clients (Moore, 1987). Bureaucratic decision making takes place under conditions of
limited time. Street—level bureaucrats work with a relatively high degree of uncertainty
because of the frequency or rapidity with which decisions have to be made. Street-level
bureaucrats characteristically have large caseloads relative to their responsibilities. High
caseload ratios relative to the street level bureaucrat responsibilities often make it
difficult to service the needs of the client academically, monitor attendance concerns,

and make individual contacts. The typical caseload ratio for school counselors is 400:1.

117

Teacher/student ratios are often set at 32:1. In order to provide a successful alternative
program the teacher/client ratio should be set at 12-15:1 and the counselor/client ratio
set at 150:1. In addition to the high number of caseloads, an emphasis on housekeeping
chores, such as filling out forms, checking student academic records, preparing for state
testing requirements, graduation duties, parent conferences, and seeing every single
student, affects the amount of time available to clients.

The availability of financial resources also affects the street-level bureaucrats’
decision making process. School districts are tied to the funding established by state
and national legislation. The required monies needed to run a successful educational
operation are constrained. The number of allocated spaces to service clients is limited
by the financial funding available in order to hire additional teachers to provide small
class size. The financial funding of education is limited by per pupil allocations. This
means that operational funds for the school district are determined by the number of
pupils enrolled in the district. The school district must set the teacher/pupil ratio at cost
effective levels.

The availability of services to clients is another issue that influences the street-
level bureaucrats’ decision making. A complication in providing services through
street-level bureaucracies comes about because the demand for service is sometimes
unpredictable. This is because the number of people treated by street-level bureaucrats
is only a fraction of the number that could be treated or because their theoretical
obligations call for higher quality treatment than is possible to provide to individual

clients (Lipsky, 1980: 37).

118

Lipsky reports the street—level bureaucrats’ environment is political and routines
chosen by bureaucracies themselves are political.
Street-level bureaucracies . . . determine the allocation of particular goods and
services in the society . . . . To say that their actions are political is to indicate
that some people are aided; some are harmed, by the dominant patterns of
decision-making. If the dominant patterns of decision-making are characterized
by routine and simplification, then the structure of these patterns must be
analyzed to determine who gets what, when, and how . . . (Lipsky, 1980).
Choices and/or decisions are made based on the street-level bureaucrat’s
personal predispositions. Decisions are often based on stereotypes, which are based on
appearance, demeanor, or other attributed qualities. In employing these stereotypes,
street-level bureaucrats are able to ration time, energy, sensitivity, and organizational
resources in a manner consistent with their tolerance for stress. Lipsky argues there
exists independent schema of decision making, and these have important differential
impacts. It is not enough to simply process people, but it is in influencing them and
their ability to act. Theoretically, there is no limit to the demand for free public services.
Agencies that provide public services must and will devise ways to ration them. This
may be done by fixing the amount or level of the services in relation to other services.
In the case of placing at-risk students in an alternative educational program, the
placement is influenced by the number of allocated spaces by the school district. This
allocation of spaces is a direct result of the school district’s budget priority. The

inconsistencies exhibited by the school district decision makers when it comes to

119

deciding which students should be placed in the alternative educational program is a
direct result of having to ration the placements themselves.

Ideally, street level bureaucrats should respond to the individual needs of the
people they serve. However, in practice they deal with their clients on a mass basis.
Service bureaucracies often favor some clients at the expense of others, despite official
policy. As in the case of public education, street level bureaucrats should respond to
the needs of the individual children, but in practice they develop techniques to respond
to the children as a class. In the placement of at-risk students in an alternative
educational program, this is evident when one student is recommended for placement
and another student, meeting the same criteria, is not recommended. Street level
bureaucracies encounter conflict and ambiguity in the tensions between client-centered
goals and organizational goals. Street-level bureaucrats deal with ambiguities and
inconsistencies relative to their responsibilities.

According to Lipsky, a “client processing mentality” is a direct consequence of
psychological stress and alienation from the job:

Street-level bureaucrats . . . impose personal conceptions of their job

when they make superior efforts for some clients, concealing that they

cannot extend themselves for all. At times this perspective results in

favoritism toward certain groups, but it may also apply without group bias

(Lipsky, 1980).

These stereotypes and prejudices can also set into motion a set of rationalizations to

limit objectives and to turn clients away (Lipsky, 1980). The decision process is

120

characterized in the form of stereotypes and prejudices. Clients perceived as hostile,
disrespectful, or apathetic may receive limited attention and service.

Accommodations of workers to job stress account for the slippage between
policy intents and policy actions. To adapt or deal with this slippage, street-level
bureaucrats have developed simplifications and routines to deal with the complexity of
the work task when the official categories prove inadequate for expeditious work
processing or if they significantly contradict their preferences.

The clients of street-level bureaucrats also influence the outcome of a decision
with their responses to the implementation of decisions (sometimes they respond
angrily to real or perceived injustices, act grateful and elated, or sullen and passive).
The ability to treat clients as individuals is significantly compromised by the needs of
the organization. These needs are based on available resources, heavy caseloads,
demands from outside agencies, and priorities and preferences of the bureaucracies.

Conflict and ambiguity encountered by street-level bureaucrats is often found in
tensions between client centered goals and organizational goals. Lipsky believes that it
is the decisions of the street level bureaucrats, the routines they establish, and the
devices they invent to cope with the uncertainties and work pressures that effectively
become the public policies they carry out. In the educational organization, the school
personnel of the individual buildings seek to meet the demands and the needs of the
students, but are torn between the restrictions and limitations imposed by the school
board and central office administrators in their role of operating the entire school
district. The major dimensions of public policy — levels of benefits, categories of

eligibility, nature of rules, regulations and services — are shaped by district policy,

121

politics, and administrative officials. The policy making roles of street level
bureaucrats are built upon two interrelated facets of their positions: a relatively high
degree of discretion and relative autonomy from organizational authority. This does not
mean that street level bureaucrats are unrestrained by rules, regulations, and directives
from the school board.

Street level bureaucrats are expected to be advocates, to use their knowledge,
skills, and position to secure for clients the best treatment or position consistent with the
constraints of the service. However, there is a contradiction in delivering street level
policy through a bureaucracy. The clients of street level bureaucracies are non-
voluntary; they obtain services which cannot be obtained elsewhere. Service is
delivered by people to people. This service, however, when delivered through the
bureaucracy invokes a model of detachment and equal treatment under conditions of
resource limitations and constraints. The achievement of advocacy is undermined by
several critical factors. First, advocacy can only be done on behalf of single units.

This, however, does not mean that only one client can be dealt with at a time, but it does
mean that advocacy may be compromised by large caseloads and mass processing of
clients. Counselors have large caseloads, which means that every minute devoted to
one client means less time for others. Second, advocacy is incompatible with
organizational perspectives. Organizations typically impose tight control over resource
dispersal. This conflict, of organizations seeking to treat all of the clients equally, and
the street level bureaucrats advocating for individual clients influences the decision
making. Third, advocacy is incompatible with controlling clients. The street level

bureaucrats must make judgments about the credibility, eligibility, and performance of

122

the clients. Street level bureaucrats do the best job they can, but their efforts are
tempered by their job responsibilities and the goals of the organization.
Edam
Stigma Offers an unusual excursion into the situation of persons who are
perceived to be unable to conform to standards which society calls “normal”.
Erving Goffman, 1963

Stigma is a negative perception of an individual or an organization. The
stigmatized perceptions of stigma are influenced by myths, stereotypes, prejudices, and
values. Stigma is manifested in the perceptions of the parents whereby they influence
their children on whether to enroll in the alternative program, the perceptions of the
counselors and teachers who are willing or unwilling to recommend students for
placement, and the perceptions of the at-risk students recommended for placement in
the alternative educational program. Goffman’s idea focuses on how stigma influences
decision making.

Originally, stigma meant a bodily sign deigned to expose something unusual or
bad about the moral status of a person. The sign was usually a visual, physical mark
that would distinguish the person from others. Goffman (1963) initially associated
stigma with three different varieties: abominations of the body, blemishes of character,
and tribal identities. To stigmatize an individual was to define the individual in terms of
a negative attribute and then devalue him/her in a manner appropriate to this label.
Today, stigma is widely used to refer to a disgrace: “A stigma is a special kind of
relationship perceived between an attribute and a stereotype” (Goffman, 1963, p. 4).

Dovidio et a1 (2000) reports that stigma is largely a social construction, shaped by

123

cultural and historical forces. It is determined by the broader cultural context (involving
stereotypes, values, prejudices, and ideologies), the meaning of the situation for the
participants, and the features of the situation. For example, in the case of placement of
at-risk students in an alternative educational program, the decision makers are
influenced by a variety of social perceptions associated with stigma (as also reported by
Dovidio et a1, 2000; Heatherton et a1, 2000; Neuberg et a1, 2000, Stangor and Crandall,
2000). In decision-making, confusion, complexity, ambiguity, and interpretation are
often based on preferences and expectations about outcomes associated with different
alternative actions. It is assumed that actions implemented are based on the best
alternatives available to the decision maker. However, in everyday events, there are
complications that influence the process and the consequence of the outcome. For
example, parents may be influenced by the perception that the alternative educational
program is not a real high school; that the child placed in the alternative educational
program will be unable to graduate from a real high school (many times the parents’
alma mater), and that placement in the alternative educational program will label their
child as a trouble-maker. The rationale, used by school personnel to place the student in
an alternative educational program may be to rectify academic failures, poor attendance
patterns, or prevent potential dropouts. HoWever, the decision maker’s (usually the
parent and/or the student) commitment is often overshadowed by the lack of this
aforementioned urgency, differences of opinions, or fear that their child’s self-esteem or
social identity will be discredited. According to Goffman (1963) stigma and its
synonyms (stereotyping and prejudice) conceal a double perspective: the stigmatized

individual will be perceived as different - one that is perceived immediately

124

(discredited) or one that is not immediately perceived (discreditable). The choice for
not placing an at-risk student in an alternative educational program will prevent the
perceived loss of social identity (associating with normal peers) and/or that attachment
of a negative connotation of being a loser. How does an organization, as in the case of
the alternative education program, become stigmatized? What affect does stigma have
on its effectiveness? Possessing an attribute that makes one different from others
constitutes stigma. In the case of placement in the alternative educational program, the
perceiver (the decision maker) may be assigning the attribute of a non-achiever to
themselves or to their child. Organizations, like individuals, also become stigmatized
(Heatherton et a1, 2000). For example, the alternative school is often perceived
negatively because the students enrolled are perceived negatively as they do not have
the same values or work ethic of the students enrolled in the traditional high school.
This stigma of the organization is often attached to the individual. Schools face serious
problems holding the interest and enthusiasm of their clients. Organizational stigma is
derived from the unintended consequences of school organization, its practices, and its
experiences.

Jones (1986, p.43) writes “Stigma refers to a faulty generalization from a group
characterization (a stereotype) to an individual member of that group irrespective of
either the accuracy of the group stereotype or the applicability of the group
characterization to the individual in question.” Stereotyping and prejudice are central
features to stigma. Social psychologists consider stereotyping to be a normal
consequence of individual’s cognitive abilities and limitations and of the social

information and experiences to which they are exposed (Dovidio, 2000). Stigma is a

125

powerful phenomenon. It is a social construction and involves two fundamental
components: the recognition of difference based on some distinguishing characteristic,
and a consequent devaluation of the person. Goffman (1963) described stigma as a sign
or mark that designated the person as “spoiled” and therefore less valued than “normal”
people. For example, in the case of the at-risk student in the alternative program, the
perception of the at-risk student is that the student is a “loser” or “druggie”. The
student is perceived as flawed, compared to the “regular” student in the traditional
educational program.

The concept of stigma is related to a negative evaluation of the person and the
social characteristic. The personal characteristic is a perception of a behavior or
condition that is thought to involve an undesirable departure from what is considered
“normal”. The social characteristic is a perception of marginality associated with a
group and is centrally defining. Goffman (1963), states that social identity involves
identity standards which individuals apply to themselves to be considered part of the
social environment. For example, students consider themselves to be accepted by their
peers and parents as a good student if they attend school on a regular basis and
experience academic achievement. The individual becomes stigmatized when he/she
accepts the standards but does not conform to the standards.

Understanding stigma and stigma involves recognizing the different perspectives
and experiences of those who are stigmatizing others and those who are stigmatized.

Figure 7.1 illustrates how stigma can be understood.

 

Figure 7.1

126

Stigma

P EM“
e ve Target

 

Perceiver

 

Personal

MI!
\

 

 

 

Group-Based

 

 

 

 

 

Cognitive Affective Behavioral

mg

 

People who stigmatize others are referred to as perceivers. The recipients of
stigma are referred to as targets. Perceivers and targets have different needs, goals, and
motivations, which can further shape how they perceive and interpret information. The
interactions between perceivers and targets are important. It is not the interaction with
others who are actually stigmatized, but with others who are believed to be stigmatized.
For example, the perceiver believes that the persons with whom the target will be
interacting will adopt the characteristics of the stigmatized. The target is a naive
participant who is randomly assigned to the condition and is unaware that he/she is
being stigmatized.

Stigma also involves perceptions of deviance but extends to general attributes of
character and identity (Dovidio, 2000). The major negative impact of stigma normally
resides in the social and psychological consequences. Most situations involving stigma
lead to social avoidance or rejection. The student recommended for placement in the

alternative program, the student considers that he/she is being isolated from their social

127

interactions with peers or being rejected from the perception of being a regular student.
Heatherton, et. al. (2000, p. 1) states,
A person who is stigmatized is a person whose social identity, or membership in
some category, calls into question his/her full humanity. The person is seen as
devalued, spoiled, or flawed in the eyes of others.

Perceptions shape reactions cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally. The perceived
controllability of stigma affects how stigmatized people or organizations construe the
reactions of others to them as well as the influence of stigma on self-esteem. For
example, the students enrolled in the alternative school will become marginalized or
will take on the perceived negative characteristics associated with the alternative school.

Fisk and Neuberg (1990) propose that people form impressions of others
through a variety of processes that lie on a continuum reflecting the extent to which the
perceiver utilizes a target’s particular attributes. At one end of the continuum are
category-based processes in which membership determines impressions with minimal
attention to individual attributes. At the other end of the continuum are individual
processes in which individual characteristics, not group membership, influence
impression. Brewer (1998) proposes that category-based processing is more likely to
occur than person-based processing because social information is typically organized
around social categories. Stigma is both an interpersonal and an inter-group
phenomenon. It affects what motives are most salient how people process information
and how they interpret information and make attributions. When personal identity is
salient, an individual’s needs, standards, beliefs, and motives determine behavior:

“When people’s social identity is activated ‘people come to perceive themselves more

128

as interchangeable exemplars of a social category than as unique personalities defined
by their individual differences from others’” (Turner et. a1, 1987, p. 50).

Affective, cognitive, and behavioral elements are basic components of stigma.
Behavioral reactions may be the consequence of affective reactions and/or cognitive
effort. Affective reactions are more likely to dominate initial reactions to stigmas that
are more individually oriented. Reactions that are more collective may initially be more
cognitive. Collective stigmas are often associated with stereotypes and influence how
information is encoded, stored, and retrieved. Affective reactions may occur initially,
but subsequent cognitive responses may temper, modify, or justify the affective
response.

It is important to emphasize that stigma is a collective and culture phenomenon.
Cultural representations are stereotypes, ideologies, values, and beliefs that are widely
known and/or shared. Stigmatized individuals, either through direct experience or
through awareness of cultural representations, know that their social identity is devalued
by others (Crocker, 1998). Awareness that one’s social identity is devalued can
influence collective personal esteem and self-esteem. Awareness of a negative
stereotype associated with a particular group or organization can produce a
stereotypical threat (Steele and Aronson, 1995). Stereotype threat can lead to self-
threat when the content of the negative stereotype is salient and relevant to the person’s
behavior or attributes in a given situation. For example, the perception that the
alternative school is for bad kids and losers influences the perception of the at-risk

student recommended for placement that he/she will be seen as a loser; this, in turn,

129

influences the student’s decision to enroll. In stigma, the target appraises the
predicament by developing coping strategies. One of these strategies is avoidance.

Why do people stigmatize? Humans value the groups to which they belong.
People stigmatize others who are seen as a threat to the membership in a particular
group. Stigma exists primarily in the minds of the perceivers and the targets as a
cultural social construction, rather than a universally stigmatized physical feature.
Stigma arises from the perceptions of group boundaries. It is manifested in an Us
versus them rationalization. For a characteristic to be associated with stigma, it must be
shared among the members of a given group. In the case of the stigma attached to the
alternative school, truancy and academic failure are perceived in the individual as being
a trouble-maker or loser. This stereotyping and prejudice, particularly in comparisons
made between so called in-groups and out-groups, affects the self-esteem and social
identity for the perceiver. This may account for the perception that placement in the
alternative program will affect the social standing of the target. The perceiver believes
that the stereotype of the student’s enrolled (troublemakers) will be attached to the
potential enrollee and will transfer to the perceiver as well; therefore, the decision is
made not to enroll in the alternative program.

Cultural stereotypes may take on a self-fulfilling prophecy. The existence, or
perceived existence, may undermine the motivation and accomplishments of members
of the traditionally devalued group. Steele (1992, 1997) states that people who feel
undervalued and marked by stigma are likely to feel threatened when faced with the

prospect of being negatively stereotyped. For example, the at-risk student may not fail

130

more frequently than others, but they may more likely feel psychologically devastated
by failure leading them to misidentify with academic achievement.

Low school achievement clearly fits as a stigma (J ussim et. a1, 2000). Low
performing students with histories of poor academic achievement are placed in
alternative programs (Oakes, 1985, Rist, 1970). Negative expectations are attached to
low-achieving students. These negative attributes undermine the students’ motivation
and render them more susceptible to confirming the negative expectations. Students
who have been stigmatized because of demographic group membership or because of
their history of low achievement are more vulnerable to the effects of expectancy.

Summary

The theories of Lipsky, Goffman, and Powell help explain the factors that
influence the decision making process of recommending and placing at-risk students in
an alternative educational program. These theories are interrelated and express the
concerns that ambiguity, advocacy, inconsistencies, client /bureaucracy relationships,
available resources, and stigma all influence the decisions made by school personnel
and parents/students. Goffman reports that both social and personal identities are part
of the concerns and definition regarding the individual whose identity is in question.
Lipsky reports relationships between the street level bureaucrats and their clients are
also influenced by the perceptions, identities, and interpretations of the people involved.
Powell reports that specialty schools were designed to improve the interactions between
the clients and the organization and also influence how decisions were made. Figure
6.2 provides a representation of the major inter-relatedness of issues presented in these

three theories.

131

 

Figure 7.2
Factors Influencing Decision Makgrg
Theorists Client Limited

Interactions Advocacy Resources Perceptions Stereotypes

 

 

 

Lipsky,1980 X X X X
Goffman, 1963 X X X
Powell, 1985 X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These three trajectories help to explain the fate of the alternative high school in
this study. The alternative high school was developed as a specialty school. It its
original design it offered an educational environment that provided distinct features that
capitalized on the interests of the students. The history demonstrated that during its
evolution the institution lost sight of the distinctive features that defined it as a specialty
school.

The street-level bureaucracy trajectory explains how the factors of limited
resources, contradictions and confusion by the school personnel in fulfilling the
organizations needs versus the clients needs, political demands imposed with the
changing succession of leadership, workers personal perceptions and predispositions
influencing decision-making, lack of consistent student advocacy, and limited services
provided to the clients based on the inconsistent application of criteria and decisions

because of unclear and unwritten policies.

132

The stigma trajectory helps explain how negative perceptions of the alternative
program and the students associated with the program influence decisions made by
school personnel, students, and parents. Figure 6.3 represents the relationship between

the trajectories presented in this chapter.

 

Table 7.3

Trajectory Relationships

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shopping Mall Institutional
High School History
Shopping Mall Institutional
High School History
Shopping Mall Institutional
High School History

 

 

 

 

 

 

In reviewing the data and the information presented in this chapter, we can
understand the role ambiguities, inconsistencies, interpretations of information, client
advocacy, adequate resources, involvement of multiple actors, and issues of stigma
found in Lipsky, Goffman, and Powell influence the decision making process.
Specifically in the scenarios, examine how different are the interpretations of student
information by the school personnel and how it varies from building to building. Not
every counselor in the different buildings makes the same kind of referral.
Inconsistencies made by the counselors in the interpretations of the situations regarding
advocacy for the client. Inconsistencies were found in the counselor’s emphasis on
academic achievement. One counselor stated, “Grades are the number one indicator for

at-risk students, but I’d rather not send a student who is failing all six classes. That

133

student just may need some counseling (This seems to be a bit of an oxymoron. The
counselor states that the child needs group counseling; however, the counseling ratio is
at 350: 1. This is another example of limited resources). School personnel reported they
gathered all of the information that is pertinent to a referral, but the end result is that the
parent and the student make the final decision. Accurate information is seldom used by
either the parent or the student. The school personnel may present accurate and
statistical information regarding the student’s attendance and failure rate, but the parent
and child make their decision based on their perceptions that the program is for losers.

This is where we see the influence of Goffman’s stigma.

134

CHAPTER 8

There were three parts to this study: Part One looked at the history of the

alternative program in the studied school district; Part Two looked at the perceptions of

administrators and staff regarding the referral process of at-risk students to the

alternative educational program and the placement process of the at-risk students in the

alternative educational program, and Part Three looked at twelve students referred to

the alternative program over a four year period in high school, and the students’

perceptions of their educational experience.

Alternative programs that are designed for the following students:

Those who have dropped out of high school

Those who are in danger of dropping out

Those who are perceived as disruptive and difficult to manage in a
traditional environment

Those that have fallen behind in grade level due to academic failure
Those who have attendance problems

Those who are living on their own and working during the day.

According to Inger (1997), the alternative school program, works best for

students who fit some or all of the following criteria:

have a goal in mind

have been lost, bored, or frustrated in a regular classroom
like to learn at their own pace

need a lot of student-teacher interaction

need to work or want to work during the day

135

Most alternative programs are designed after Raywid’s three conceptual models.

Table 8.1 provides a summary of Raywid’s three conceptual models.

 

Table 8.1

Alternative School Models

 

Placement Focus Cost Assumptions Outcomes
Type 1 Students make Restructured classroom, Least costly Problem with Success rate
School of decision to programmatic themes, way school more lasting.
Choice attend departure from traditional relates to Designed
curriculum student around
interests of
student
Type 2 Mandatory Behavior modification, Problem with Yields few
Last Chance placement by little attention to student benefits,
school modifying curriculum problems not
resolved
Type 3 Student Choice Remediation/rehabilitation, Most costly Problem with Behavior
Remediation social/emotional growth student improves, but
success does
not last
Part One

In part one; this study looked at the alternative educational program in one

specific school district, from its inception to the present day. The programs

implementation of the program was an example of Powell’s ideas behind the specialty

school: “High schools similarly offer specialty shops: the students in them are regarded

by the school as special, as preferred customers” (Powell, 1985, p. 118). The study

revealed that over the years the program evolved from the concept of a specialty school

to a watered down version of the traditional high school program. The original design

of the alternative school program was to service students who were considered to be at

high risk of dropping out of school because of attendance, and academic and behavioral

136

problems that prevented them from operating successfully in a public school setting.
The age group served was from 14-18 years of age. In these early years, referrals to the
alternative school were based solely on the student’s academic achievement and
attendance patterns. However, over the years, discipline issues became a major factor
that influenced referrals. Students who had attendance problems and who experienced
academic failure were identified for placement, but disciplinary problems became a
major factor in the decision of who was to be referred to the alternative program. This
shift in the referral policy is an example of the influence of stigma and may have
contributed to the fate of the reform. The consideration and use of the student’s
disciplinary record reinforced the stigma that the school was a place for drugies and
losers. In addition to factoring disciplinary issues into the referral process, the
curriculum of the alternative program changed to reflect what was offered at the
traditional school. This change, it was reasoned, supported the idea that if a student
chose to return to the traditional program, course offerings would be in alignment and
the student would lose no learning. Counselors reported that the system, as it is
presently constructed, is not working:

It’s only working for a small minority. Some students are placed in the

alternative program that shouldn’t be placed, and some students are not placed

in the program because they want to stay in their regular high school.

School personnel are inconsistent in the use of the unwritten criteria of applying
attendance and lack of academic achievement as guidelines for student referral. Some

of the students in this study were referred to the alternative program because of high

137

absenteeism and academic failures, while some of the students referred were also major
discipline problems in the traditional high school.

According to the information presented in the case study, the alternative school
began as a School of Choice. The school followed Raywid’s model 111. However, the
program gradually evolved into a cross between Raywid’s Last Chance program and the
Remediation program was a key component of the program. The student would be able
to return to the traditional high school upon achieving academic success in the
alternative program. However, the counselors reported that this unwritten intention was
not always imparted to the student and/or the parents. The student was led to believe
that enrollment in the alternative school was a final placement, when in reality the
student could return to the traditional school once their academic standing was
improved. This ambiguity of lack of written criteria may have influenced the academic
achievement of the students enrolled in the alternative high school. Because there were
no written school district guidelines about who should be referred to the alternative
program there was inconsistency in the way students were referred to the program.
These students may have assumed the stigma that they were losers, the outsiders. A
high school counselor reported:

It is a subjective process. Sometimes a teacher will report a concern about a

student’s lack of academic progress, but at other times teachers are reluctant to

refer students to us for consideration. The process is only working to a degree.

If we had specific criteria, made teachers more aware about the alternative

program, and had a lot more PR in the community the alternative program

138

would be more successful. Referrals to the program were a hit or miss type of

referral.

The inconsistencies shown are what Lipsky (1980) reports as a lack of
knowledge, information, values, and conception of purpose. The major actors may find
their commitment to a policy incompatible with other important priorities: they may be
dependent on other players who lack the same sense of urgency; they may have
differences of opinion or are constrained by the demands of the other players. Lipsky
(1980) reports that implementation problems arise when policy does not specify
objectives clearly, provide adequate resources, and have too high expectations.
Established policy may have more support, but it does not ensure that the
implementation process will be successful. Failures in programs can be attributed to
failures in implementation. In the alternative educational program that was studied,
specific criteria for identifying at-risk students, specific criteria for placement, and
specific individuals in charge of making the decision for placement, specific criteria for
acceptance, and specific attention to outcomes with feedback to improve the process.
None of which is evident in the Brown School District. As reported by counselors and
administration, the program is not working to expectations. This lack of intent in the
implementation process may have caused confusion in the students as to what was their
purpose was in attending the alternative high school. Was the purpose of their
enrollment to earn lost credits and improve their academic standing in order to return to
the traditional high school, or was it to prepare them for post-secondary careers? This

ambiguity further impacted on the success of the program.

139

One of the problems vocalized by the counselors was that the school district had
a low priority for supporting the alternative program: “Money drives the system. If the
money is not there, you can’t build a successful program.” This is an example of
Lipsky’s theoretical issue of limited resources influencing the decision making in street
level bureaucracies and of Raywid’s research of institutional legitimacy.
Part Two

In Part Two, this study looked at the perceptions of the referral process and the
success of the alternative program that were held by the school personnel. The overall
conclusions of the school personnel are that the referral process has not been successful.
It is evident that the existing referral process reflects Lipsky’s (1980) concept of
unstructured decision making. Administrative decision-making, within educational
organizations, are either structured (programmed decisions) or unstructured (unexpected
decisions). Structured decisions follow direct, well-stated written policy. Unstructured
or unexpected decisions are made when there is inconsistency in the decision-making.
This usually occurs when policy is unwritten and left to the interpretation of the
decision-makers. Effective decisions are made by recognizing the problem, clarifying
the related issues, collecting information, setting priorities, and implementing the
solution. Although procedures and criteria used to solve problems are usually fairly
well established, the decision—maker must collect all the pertinent information, interpret
the criteria, and apply this to a specific person (Lipsky, 1980). In the case of placement
of at-risk students in an alternative educational program, the pertinent information is the
student’s rate of attendance, acquisition of academic grades, and behavioral

interventions.

140

The perceptions of the school personnel reveal the influence stigma has on
decision making. Goffman reports that stigma is the negative perception held by the
decision maker. In this case study the decision makers, which are the parents and the
students, saw referral to the alternative program as unacceptable for their child. Hence,
they did not want their child to participate in the program because of the negative
stigma attached to the program. The stigma attached to myths, stories and stereotyping
not only influenced the parents and students in their decision of whether to attend or not
attend the alternative program, but it also influenced the school personnel who make the
decisions to refer. One counselor reported that “teachers often don’t refer students to us
for placement in the alternative program because they don’t know about the program.
They think it is for the trouble makers or the students with substance abuse problems,”
and “The community’s perception of the alternative program is that it is a bad place for
kids, it’s a place for kids; with drug problems.” Counselors reported that parents do not
want to label their child as an alternative student. Parents and students see the
alternative school as a negative place to continue education. This is an example of the
findings of Dovidio’s, et a1. (2000), namely, that stigma is largely shaped by cultural
forces, myths, stereotypes, prejudices, and ideologies. These shape the meaning of the
situation for the participant. The perceivers are influenced by the myth that the
alternative educational program is not a real high school. Parents are often under the
misconception that if their child is placed in the alternative high school, he/she will not
be able to graduate from a real high school, and that placement in the alternative
program will label their child as a trouble-maker. This negative perception supports

what Goffman (1963) reports, namely, the stigma and its synonyms conceal a double

141

perspective. The stigmatized individual will view himself as different that is perceived
immediately (discredited), or one that is not immediate (discreditable).

In analyzing the scenario data, responses of the administrators and counselors
regarding referral of students for placement in the alternative educational program
reveals many inconsistencies. Recapping statistical outcomes regarding the referral
process of both the fictional and actual students for placement in the alternative
educational program, the researcher found no significance between the group
assignment and the referral. N 0 specific criteria, in the referral process, were used
consistently by both groups. Each of the students cited in the scenarios had attendance
problems, academic failures, and behavioral issues. Each group looked at these
descriptive characteristics assigned to the students but weighted their concerns
differently.

Examine the actual students depicted in Scenario B. These students were
enrolled in the Brown School District. Information presented in the scenario was
factual. Student 18 (Jenny) was recommended for placement by two of the counselors;
the remaining four counselors and two administrators did not recommend the student
for enrollment in the alternative high school. In reality, Jenny (13) was never referred
to the alternative program. At the end of her first semester in the traditional high school
(1999/2000) she had earned a total of one credit. At the end of the 2001/2002 school
year she had earned a total of four credits. Student 2B (Gene) was recommended for
placement in the alternative high school by one administrator and two counselors. One
counselor did not respond. One administrator and three counselors did not recommend

placement in the alternative high school. In reality, Gene was never referred for

142

placement at the alternative high school. At the end of his first semester in the
traditional high school (1999/2000), Gene had earned a total of 0.5 credits. By the end
of the 2001/2002 school year, Gene had earned a total of 2 credits. Student 3 B (Bob)
was recommended for placement by one administrator and two counselors. One
administrator and three counselors did not recommend him for placement in the
alternative high school. In reality, Bob was never referred for placement in the
alternative high school. Bob earned 0.5 credits by the end of his first semester in the
traditional high school (1999/2000). At the end of the 2001/2002 school year, Bob had
earned a total of 6.5 credits. Student 43 (Joe) was recommended by one administrator
and three counselors for placement in the alternative high school. Two of the
counselors recommended that Joe not be placed in the alternative high school. Two
counselors did not comment. In reality, Joe was not referred to the alternative high
school. He was attending middle school and had failed all of his core content classes at
the end of the 2001/2002 school year. Joe enrolled in the traditional high school in the
fall of the 2002/2003 school year. These inconsistencies are an example of what Lipsky
(1980) reported as decision making being unconnected to actions. At-risk students may
or may not be referred for placement based on attendance problems or academic failure.
The roles of complexity, ambiguity, and interpretation in decision making are often
underestimated. Preferences, rules, policy, people, and outcomes are mixed together in
ways that make the interpretation uncertain and unclear. Decision making theory is
based on preferences and expectations about outcomes associated with different
alternative actions. It is assumed that the actions implemented are based on the best

alternatives available to the decision makers. However, there are complications that

143

influence the processes and the consequences of the event. Ambiguity about
preferences affects implementation of decisions. The lack of written policy/guidelines,
the interpretation of information of the school personnel and personal preferences
influenced the decision made for placement in the alternative program. It is interesting
to note that all four students described in Scenarios B, who were actual students in the
school district, were never referred for placement in the alternative program.
Perceptions, simplifications, and routines of decision—makers, especially when
there is more than one decision-maker involved, influences the outcomes of decisions
(Lipsky, 1980). One counselor explained,
The way it is now, it is not working. We should be able to tell parents that their
child needs to be placed in the alternative program. All we can do now is to
suggest that the student be placed in the alternative program. Right now it’s just
a conversation with the parents. We need earlier counselor intervention in the
sixth grade.
Part Three
In Part Three, the study looked at the academic achievement, attendance, and
graduation of the students during the four year period from 1999/2000 to 2002/2003,
and their perceptions of their school experiences and educational outcomes. The data
collected, indicates disparity between the at-risks students attending the alternative high
school and the at-risk students attending the traditional high school.
0 Students attending the alternative high school did not fare as well as those at-

risk students attending the traditional high school.

144

0 Students attending the alternative school, on average, missed more days each
year than those attending the traditional high school.
0 Students attending the alternative high school, on average, earned fewer credits
each year than those attending the traditional high school.
0 Students attending the alternative high school graduated fewer students than did
in lower numbers those attending the traditional high school.
What is interesting is that the expected result of success for at-risk students who
attended the alternative program would be better than those students who attended the
traditional high school. This reversal of the results was unexpected. The goal of the
alternative high school was to provide a learning environment designed to meet the
needs of the students and promote their success to graduation; meanwhile, it was
expected that the at-risk students enrolled in the traditional high school would continue
to experience attendance problems, academic failure, and non graduation. The at-risk
students enrolled in the alternative high school experienced the opposite result: only one
out of the six students graduated high school. Five of the six students who attended the
traditional high school program graduated. The disparity in these unexpected results
raises the question of what were the reasons for these differences. The motivational
factor of the students may be one reason. Students enrolled in the alternative high
school may have perceived no differences between the school curriculum from which
they came and the curriculum of the alternative high school. Repeated failures
experienced at the alternative high school may have caused them to give up. A review
of the history of the alternative program showed the program changed from a hands—on

design to one of a straight academic curriculum that mirrored the traditional high

145

school. Another possible explanation may be the lack of familial support provided to
the group enrolled in the alternative high school. The students enrolled in the
traditional program may have experienced more positive support from family members.
This, again, may be attributed to the negative perception of students enrolled in the
alternative program. A third possible reason for the disparity may be that the students
who enrolled in the alternative program had a longer history of disciplinary issues in the
traditional program. These disciplinary issues may have carried over into their
education at the alternative high school. Another factor: too many absences create large
gaps in learning that cannot be made up.

Other significant findings include the majority of students in both groups
reporting they did not feel confident in their post high school environment. They did
not elaborate on the reasons why. Each of the twelve students reported that they had
good communication skills and could hold down jobs, but only one-third of each group
was employed either part-time or fulltime. The majority of the twelve students reported
problems managing their finances and were lacking skills in that area. The students in
each program report they were equally uninvolved or vested in their school community.
Researchers (McCall, 2003) noted that children are less likely to do well in school when
they feel disconnected from that school. The students in this study had limited or no
experience with extra curricular activities in their schools or their communities.

In this study, the information and data was collected and analyzed presented in
this study, yet the question remained: What became of alternative high school reform?
When the alternative program was initiated, and students experienced success, the

Brown School District made the alternative high school program a priority by providing

146

financial and educational support. Originally, the program was developed with the
interests of the students in mind. Classes included a hands-on curriculum that engaged
the students, student/business partnerships, day-care facilities, and innovative courses.
Over time the school changed. A significant event that brought about a shift in the
direction the program took was the change in leadership. Hargreaves and Goodson
(2006) point out it is the changes of leaders and leadership that most directly and
dramatically provoke change in an individual building. Over time, Jefferson Alternative
High School lost its original purpose. The school became alternative in name only and
gradually was allowed to languish. The community’s perception of the school became
stigmatized because the program gradually began enrolling students seen as druggies,
losers, and misfits which reinforced the community’s perception. The robust distinctive
identity and mission of the school changed to an outlet for placing undesirable students.
The hands-on instruction became busy work. The alternative high school became a low
priority for the school district; the mission drifted and became blurred and unattractive.
The data revealed that the alternative school did not provide the educational outcomes
once experienced by the students enrolled in the program. In this study, the students
enrolled in the alternative school did not experience the same success as those who
chose to remain in the traditional school.

In this study, when asked whether the identifying and placing of the at-risk
student in the alternative school was a high priority in this school district, the school
personnel ranked the district’s priority from moderate to low. A further (second)
question asked was where on the list of priorities should the school district rank the

identification and placement of the at-risk student in the alternative school, each of the

147

school’s personnel responded with a resounding high. The school personnel were asked
how alternative program was working. Their responses were similar:

0 It’s only working for a small minority. Some students are placed that
shouldn’t be there, and some that would benefit are not placed because they
want to stay in the traditional high school for social reasons.

0 The way it is now, it is not working.

0 Obviously not! There should be a lot more students placed.

0 The program would work if the administration backed the program and
allowed us more freedom and flexibility.

Reflections

After collecting the information and data presented in this study, the question
remains: What became of the alternative high school reform? When the alternative
program was initiated and the students experienced success, the district made it an
educational priority item by providing financial and educational support. The program
was originally developed with the interests of the student in mind. The classes included
hands-on curriculum that engaged the students, student/business partnerships, day-care
facilities, and innovative courses. Over a period of time the school changed. One of the
significant events that brought about a shift in the direction the program took was the
change in leadership. Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) point out it is the changes in
leaders and leadership that most directly and dramatically provoke change in an
individual building. The alternative high school lost its original purpose, and the
alternative soon became alternative in name only. The alternative aspects of the school

gradually languished. The school became stigmatized in the community’s perception.

148

The school district tacitly abetted the stigma process by enrolling students seen as
druggies, losers, and misfits. The robust distinctive identity and mission of the school
changed to an outlet for placing undesirable students. Hands-on instruction became
busywork. The alternative high school became a low priority budget item for the school
district; the mission drifted and became blurred and unattractive. The data revealed that
the alternative school did not produce the educational outcomes once experienced by
the students enrolled in the program. In this study, the students enrolled in the
alternative school did not experience the same Success as those who chose to remain in
the traditional school.

Alternative school reform programs have been studied carefully over the past
four decades. These studies have shown contradictory results: parental support and
parental skeptics; students engrossed in learning and with better attendance versus
apathetic students; students experiencing academic achievement versus students
continuing to fail; students with positive attitudes about themselves and the school
versus students with negative perceptions of themselves and the school; and programs
designed to meet individual needs and interests of the students versus programs
designed to meet the needs of students as a class. The findings of this study support
what the research of Hargreaves and Goodson (2006), Tyack and Tobin (1994), Fink
(2000), Fullan (1993), and Stein et. al (2004) have found that the further away reforms
get from the traditional grammar of high school, the more likely those reforms will not
sustain themselves, and various forces such as demographic, leadership succession,
organizational ambiguities, and stigma will result in pulling the school back to look

indistinguishable from any other high school. Sustaining fundamental reform at the

149

high school level by changing the regularities of the high school, by way of the
curriculum, time management, and student behavioral norms is extremely difficult.
Innovations can be implemented successfully with effective leadership, sufficient
budget, and strong internal and external support (Gross, Giacquinta, and Bernstein,
1971), but few innovations seem to be institutionalized (Anderson and Stiegelbauer
1994; Fullan, 1991). The grammar of schooling reasserts itself (Tyack and Tobin,
1994). The sustainability of reform is influenced by economic availability, school
district politics, leadership succession, perceptions, and clear policies. Tyack and Tobin
(1994) summarized the outcome of reform nicely: Reform movements that reinforce the
existing ‘ grammar” of subjects, classes, lessons, and testing are more likely to be
adopted and become institutionalized. Innovative reform that challenges the “grammar”
enjoys only temporary success. Hargreaves and Pink (2004) report that the key
principles of reform sustainability appear to be that reform needs to focus on what
matters, make improvement last, and achieve its end without doing harm to others
around it. In this study the alternative school did not sustain its viable programs
because of the succession of leadership, negative perceptions, unwritten and unclear
policies, and the blurring of its innovative features.

This alternative school was created to provide distinctive schooling that would
serve the particular needs of its particular students, the so-called square pegs who do not
fit in the round holes. A key element to sustained reform is evaluation. Reform needs
to be viewed in the rearview mirror of reflection and not for serving the ambitions of the
policy makers of the moment. The sustainability of reform requires steady focus on

both student learning and achievement; on developing a clear process; on finding ways

150

to make learning more vivid and real; on retaining standards but refraining from
standardization; and on treating history and experiences as strengths to be drawn from
rather than obstacles to be overcome in the quest for improvement (Hargreaves and
Goodson, 2006).

The goal of education is to provide all children with the knowledge, skills, and
attitudes necessary to become contributing members of the community. With the new
educational standards placed on students today, namely, graduation requirements, it is
imperative that educational reform help those students for whom high school
traditionally does not work. Is the alternative school the answer? The case under study
here casts doubt on this approach to reform, but other high school reforms have suffered
similar fates. The suspicion that marginalized students become further marginalized via
inattention and heedlessness is perhaps supported in this case, but such person-centered
attributions are not particularly useful. Rather, the case adds one more example of
historical and institutional process that now has been widely identified. I suspect there
is likelihood that neither the alternative high school nor the traditional high school will
respond effectively to these disaffected or alienated youth. I believe the outcomes
experienced by students in the alternative high school studied in this research are not the
failure of the school itself. I believe the outcomes reported in this study are attributed to
a lack of will and purpose on the part of the students. Student motivation or lack
thereof is a critical influence for the academic success of the individual student. If
there is an implication for policy and practice here it is to alert educators to all of these
forces and tendencies as one check on reform choice and implementation. The long

haul is worth heeding as well as the short term.

151

APPENDIX A

152

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RES. 58...in $5.55 some .m.m. 55
a .o: m. .. a do: w. .o EB 05 PO meadow «Es—wok.
50850.5: m. £33.”. :05 3 35.32. 0.3 .c. I do a? a. VB...
5:2. 5...... S wean. tone.— ..m\Q: v. 5952. m. -3 mic—2A. Lo.
.5553.“ :5th 5:2. a wig 50.57. 35 3:9. 55.55
35.02% 65350 a 3.9585 52:3 3:025 m. 5:555. 96.525
cost; 3.8% 08:. .265. :5 .5355 a :08 3:52 cost? .53.; 32.8
o: 8e 22; 8 8: Pa 03 3.8.5 . m. 3.502 55: o?— 3 .3 03 $5.82 w=.5oz 05 m. 3:3
.5555
m. 8.22.2.
:5 .585 58.1.5.5.
amen 2a 8:
85.55:“ 33 .23 39..
new 888 o: 83 805
“mu... .858 :5 State :03 on
.25; a. 38 so. new 3 5.8. 9 9 Ho: 53%
8: m. z :5 dog—.33 358.. was 9.3 $525 $5.75
55.58555 .8322. 3 33.558 an 5.8. “3:2. $555.5. 5..
ea 22 see. 5252 < see; 5:8 53 Bow e 3.6.. See;
03 .mtSto o. 58.3: 03 .3 .35 5.5.98 53.5 25.2. um: 03 dams» 53.5 98.5.5
cost; 5550? 205 :5 .0 053a a :08 55...? a. 3.8qu .0 $5.87. 32.8
on one odoz... e. 308. . >65. 3.8... so: 5.. .530: 0?. o: m. 80:... ecu—85820 05 m. 5:?
2%
do .5. .0
5:2. 55...? 5055.358
3:9. 53...? 5:2. 55.28 .8.
35.; a 58 a m. 0.55 a m. 205 58 53.»? b8 .o .93 .8 5:2. 5:55
8.: oz 55: 3.. 5.55 rec: . 5.55 :83 ago: 0?. m. 5.502 325. {5.5 . 265. £85 . 98.555
32.8
o5 m. 22.3
m 82 . N Om: . _ Om: . _ Owe. _ N Om: H _ Om: m N am: _ _ cm: _ ceased _

 

mBma>MmEtZH ANZZOmMmE AOOmOm m0 Nay—.33).

153

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.05, 0 00.05 5005:: 00:0: 0.00 03 .0505: 0.0 05 50:0 8 0. 5:00 5:0
00 050:0: 0:05:00 05 . 05.5055 500.. .00:00 -50: 0 0. 0. .. 505 :00 5:0 :0:00:::0
05 00w 3 .h: 03w . 000:0 5:0 :0: .:w.: 050:0: :00 .m... 5 :0 50 .5.
03 5050:: :030.0 5:0 00.505000 0:0. 00:0: .9. 000 03 .050: 5.0000000 0: 03 0.5.00:
.50 0.0 05 :0500505 60:05:00.0 :0:0 50.50:: 0. :0..050? 0 00 :0 5.0» 0. 050.0 5.5: 0:0 050:0: ..
50:0 050: 0:0.:0-0:0 5.3 .50 0.0 05 5:0 50000500 0.00:3 0.00 50550 505 050:0: :00
:0000. 0 5:00 50:50:35 05030:: 00 .0055. 0:0 0. :0.00500 ”00505 .m .2 :.0: .05 03 50:00:05.
03 .m505 :0..050 0 .050 w5>0: 50550 5:0 .50 0.0 0:... 505 00 0.00. 50.50:: 05 0. 0:05:00 ..
0:0 .05 000.0 ..050 0:0 0:3 055. 50:0: 0:... A80 .0055» 03 .00....0 005 000300 0050:. 0:0
00:3 50:0 50:0 0:00 .0 00: 0 00.05 50.50:: .50 w:.0.00:0. 5:005:00 0 3 50.50:: :0 0:0 0:05
55.55 . 505000.: 5:0 :305 0.0 0.0 05 50:0 0.5? 05 00 .50 0.0 05 .00000.0 ..050
0:00 :050: .50 3.0000 . 0.0: 505 00 0:00 :0:0: 05 0:000 :305 50:00 0.05005. “5050::
50: .05 0.0 00:00.5 0. 05:0. :00 5:0 50:0: 00 00:05am 0:0 M550. >05 .50 0.0 05
505 :00 5:0 :305 50:00 :0 00.0 0:0 05 000500 00 .0 :00:. 05 00:05:00 000ww=0 5:0 50:0 50550
5:05:00 00 0. 0:05am . 05.0. 000: .. 0. :0.00550 ..00 .05 0M 000:... 050:0: 8 0:00 00 0:00 03
:305 05 :00 50:00:55. 0:0 5030:: 000.0 0. 5.50 505 0:0:0: :mR... 03 00000.0 0050:» :00: 5050::
03 00000.0 :0. 500: 505.5055 5 M55950 00:03 5:0 05 0.00:0 0.505000 00:05:00.0 .50 0.0 05
0:00 0:05 5:056 05 .0 000:0: 0:0 0:3 5050:: 05 0 >9 0:05:00 0:05 :0 N 5 :00: 5 50500 0.0.:
:0 m m5..0. 0505 505:05 0:0 0:3 30:0. 00:05:00 :0.0: 50:0 0305. 0 :0.0: 5.0008005. 00 0.00.. .05 -00 :0 M505:
050550 05 0:. 50:55. 03 .m .2 0. 5000::00 50:0: 0 00 5:00:58 .. 00050:: :0 5.00550 :0. 00000::
.0 :0000500 :00: 2 0500.300 0:0 0:0:000... .. 05508:: 00 0500 0.50550 00:000. .050.0:
00 00: 00: 0:05:00 0. 00000:: 505:3 5000.0:00 :55 5:000. 00 0.00. . 5:0 05 a: 05 :w:0:5
0 00.05 03 0 00:0 550.0: 0:... 0. 5.507. 0: 0. 0:0:... 0 0055050m 50.00500 0505 550.0: 05 0:0...
00000.0
00000.0 0w:0. :0..050 0:03
5 00.3.50 :0.:0: .05 50550
0:05:00 50.. .0 0000 :0 0:55
:0500050 05 .3 b... .0 55.. 00.5
3.00:0 0 00: 0:00 0. 5:0: 5.5500 00:
...0:0: 0. 5030:: 505000.: 5.0550580
:00:? :0.>0:0: :5 55:0: 5:35:00
. 0 002 _ N 002 _ . 00.2 . _ 00< _ 0 00: H _ 00: _ N 00: . . 00: _ 8002.0 _

 

50:50:00. mam..>~.m....7.. AmZZOmmmn. AOOEUm ”.0 NEH/0.5,.

154

 

 

 

 

=2 _ .0525

 

 

a 2:0..—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ofi 55 28 o3

5:05.85 moE:o::0m
5:23 .53 a a: 32.
2:0: Eon osm d:o 30:0—
_ @328 o5 8.25.00
:8 20.85.00 .2: o5 oo—
do so o5 o3 83285
:0 20.85.00 0: 0:20: o5
.m .m .= a2:
o5 35 :22: do 20 o5
H .353: 30% Son:
.5935 2: m:_=oo :8 _ £00
905:: 0: 35m ox: ..:0d 0d 55 .2
:2: o 8.9: _ .8598 :8 8:23
d5 22MB: oz: 0. o80m .=:E
0::odooa 0:8 d:o :33 an 3:08:00
PEodBm o5 .._0_om::00 gm :2: d5 2: 3:20:
300: 0:8 0: do do o5 odoE :30 .325 20
$220: d5 0: a: 2 3.2 oz: 808:8 0:3 853%
22.83 o5 o5 :5 .58 E23 >5:— dotoq
5? 3:38 o3 20:82: 30: on 0.00. @338 EN
8 @533 >5 .8265 o3 9:253. o5 .20 d:o o5
a o>on 02: 0. b: o3 :0uooado 3 d5 dotoa
o3 62:0 d:-30=8 30on wEo—EE :—
:0umowwsm :8 5.258 :0 3:23 on: :0 d:o o5
a 2 5 do .03 o5 0: o5 30 30:5 3 20:2 m5

£3: 2:0: :o>0 : EB _ o3 .2238: 22on o5 o5 on 8.02 :o>0

:oQO o5 :2? 5:23 o5 :25 03> 0: E20: $:od_:m .:0:o2o>:00 2:: 35

:0 Efimoa :8 2:0: 8.8 688 o5 d5 Eodam .20 :80 o m: 3.25: : d5 .52on

o5 0: 0: 323.2: 0d 0: @8de on: ow2500:o o5 48:02 :22on do do .zo o5

m 82 A N 82 _ _ 0m: _ _ 0m< _ N 8: _ _ 0m: _ N mm: P _ am: a 853d J

 

202.5809 m3m=>mmFZH AmZZOmmmE AOOIUm m0 EMF/VGA

155

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o: 0: 80 8:8: 8:
:0: 0:0 :0» :5: 02:20
.28: 80:: d8 22:0
2 :0::00:0: :83 0d 0: 8: .m .:
0>:awo: : 8: :: .92: 0:: 0:: =0 :0 ::0
E20: 0 .8 :5 :8: 02:: 8:: :82 =.>o::
.:0::00:0: 08000: 8:03 8:: :2on
82:00:: 0:: 0d :.:00 do .80 .A:0:0>:0::
8:: 098:0 8:: :20. o:: 0:: 0: :20» 60:38::
0: >8 _ .88: 0:80 0: =2: :3 8:: 02:: .:2::0::8 8 20:38:»
22:2: :0: 8:288 8:025 8: :22 20 2::
83 2:2: 0:3: ._00:8 :2: 8:028 .33 2 8 :22: 20:: 8000::
0:: 28:05 8:03 0:: :02 0 :0: 8 :::0 8:02: :0: 3: .m .m 80:: d5:
:88: 0:0 0: 3:03 0:3 22:2: do 22:2: :0 82:03 0: .mi :8:w2
.9280: 8: :20: d5: :33 8:: 0:: :05 0:: 80:: :8: 8:025 22:2: do 0: :2280:
._00:8 0:: :0 0:: 0d :28 8 :0::02o: 8:028 82:20:20 8:: 0:: 80:: 8:028: 08:
:0::00:o: 0:: 0:3 :2: o::. 0: 0:8 0: 2-22:: 8:028 d5: -8 .:0 8000::
8:: d::2« o:: o::: 20:: .220 80:: o::: 8:61 -0: o:: 8:20: :0 :: o:: :0 «22:2: do
8 2:: 0: 885:: 8:03 :0: :0::0 22:2: :.:20 8:20 0::oo:08:: 88: 308:8: 8:: 2 88:8:
w20w 8 28:0 0:: 0d :.:00 :8: 0:: 8 do .8: .:0_. :=o:: : m::::::::0 0: 8 205. 3:08: :05:
80:: :05 0:3 8:025: E2w2: do 0:: 0:2 .3: 22:2: :.:: .8800: 8:028 o:: 8:32: 85:82
8:20: 8: 2:82 8:: o:: 8:: 0: 20:08:00 do 8:: o:: 8 202008: 85:82 2 :0: 008: a 2 ow:0=0:0
:020: .9: 0:: 0: 82:: :5: 8:20: 0:: :5: 20:08: 0: 8:088 8:: 8:08: 8 0w:0=0:0 8 22:2: do 803::
2 o:: o:: 8:: :02“: 8 :: w::0:_>:00 w:::00 8:25 w:_02>:00 8035 8:: 0:: :25. o:: 8 8:3
.8
50:0 :25.
.0: 0: 08:
:.:0d 8::
S: .:0::0
:8 8 8:: 8:028: o::
::02::: 0:: :23 2::02:
_ m 82 : N 8:): _ : 82 : : 08 d N 8: : : 8: : N 8: : : 8: : 552.0 _

 

90:22:00: mgmH>MmFZH AMZZOmmm: AOOEUm m0 X5336:

156

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:0:0 0:: .:2:: 25222:: 8 :0.: 80 30::
.:::0:0 :20:: 82 0:3 20:0:0: .m .:.: 0: :0
::: :0: o:: o:: 8::. :28: 0>02 0: 820
:0: 2:23 ...::&8:: B 2.5.: -5 :82...
0:: :0 02: =::: 0:: 8::. 20:82:00 :80 0: :00: :.:2:d
0:: :.:: :_2:: .80 :0: :.:0d .8323: .m .2 o:: :22: :0:
: ._00:8 8::. .:::0::: 0: 8 20:: 2 882:: 388 o:::
o:: :0 0:82 02:: :8; :2: 8: .m .:.: 0:82 :0 ::00:0: .0:
0:: 8:: 020m .8880 2 28 :0>0: 8:082 .220: 0:: 820880:
8: .2882 8:82: :0 .m .2 0:: 802008: :: :80 8:8: 2: :0::
.0200 :0 28:2: 8028220 8 :8: :22 0:: 82:0: :2 2:: 80:22:20
:26 0: :8: : 0: :30: 8:2: .882 :20: 8:: 008: : :0::0: :8: ::
8 8:80:80 8:0: 380: :: : 2 203 :0:: 0:: :22 82:: 2 :8 82:3 22:2: 0: H 2 220 20::
028:0: 8:3 ..d:::0 :: 20:82 ::::.. :0: 8 :2::020: .220 20:: 883 22::
:0 d2: 80.: :28:: 03:2: 22:2: do 0: 28:: :0 808: 2:: .m.:: 82:2
8::. .2000: 2 :0.. :00: o: :.:2:03 .::: 0:: 8:: 0:05. 20:82 22:20:: :0 0:: :0 ::0
00:0: : 8: : 0:: :.:2d :0:: 0: .32 8 :22 o::. 2:52: :0:8 0:: 8:3 8::: 220
220 20.6 :0.: $03.. :3: 20:82 3222200 :0: :88: :.:0d 8:8: 20:: :83
”o:::Ed 20:: :2:0: 8:02: 0:: : 8 :: .082 802008: :.:0d 8:8: .:2o::0::
: 8 22:2: 0:0020: :: 2: :0:: 2 22:2: :00: : 8: :0: 828:: :2:
do 8: 202008: 0:: 8:: 88:0: 0:: 80:: 22:2: do 0:: E3 03 :8 200: :23 8::: :0:: :22:2:
0:: :22:0::: 08 8:08: :.:: 8.800: 80:83: 2: o::. .m .:.: 882:0 0:: 8 :0:: 22: :2:— :d::.. do 8: 2
802:: .208 o:: 20:: 0:8 :.:03 :0 :0:: 0: :0 0>02 0: 8:: 2:: 2:: 888:0: :0: 008: : 8 808: .:.OZ
8:: 08:0: : .0288: 22:2: 22:2: do ::::_:.. : 08: 20:82:00 :20: 22:2: do 0:: 882::
8:08: o:: 00: do 2: .2: o:: :00:: :0:: 08:0: :2 :30: 2:: :.:0d 2: 0:: 8:: 202 .33
20:80:80 :.:0d 8::. .2 0:: 82:: 020: 82:22 :0: 882:: 8: :08: 882:: 8:820: 3:082 0::
088:0: o::. 2:: 8:08: 08 20: .:. 2: 8:08: 28 888: 08: 03 20:88:88: 222200 0:28 8:3
.0228
:0:: ::0::0
.220 20:: 28:02
008: 0: o::: 0: :8:
_ m 82 _ N 82 _ _ 82 _ : 8... _ N 8: _ : 8: : N o:: W : :8: _ 8:85 _

 

9:025:00: mgmfi>mm2 2mZZOman: 40030: ":0 5:22

157

 

 

 

 

“EH93 mut—
oEom .805
~88 rcou
03 8 .m .3
05 3 xo 3
£35 “.55
03 mg— :3
-3 2a 805
883088
.3885 :05
xi :5 as
mun—o 03820
5 83

EB 259%
05 one:

o? 8:83
8353 a .58
£53 03
manure—com
.59.qu

do a? as

5 Ex 05 com
9 =83 raou
.35 8263
£5— .82
Cat E283
8:5 mo

$3 .wE 09
93 £858
BO .823:
330:

 

3030.5
8:986
088 mg 205
32:: 5&2
know 3:3»:
witch—om
dogma:

rcou witch“:
ESQ

.3 a? 05
35 b5 Chou
€2.82 05 a

 

.m .m s =25
on 9 momma—o
e we =5 m
953 a. 2.3
EouBm .m

.2 a 8098

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F mom:

_

N Um:

_ Um:

82695an m>9m=>mmh7n AmZZOmMm—m AOOEUm m0 553.2

_

_ Um<

_

N Um:

_

u Um:

_

N 9mm

_ 9mm

_

3:85

_

158

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

% 058.880
0882.0 000:0: 0:: 0: ...:0» :0:.
0:. 5.8:... 0: :0: 2:05 0.»... 8.00
0050805 0:0 .w:0.0: »0:. 800:5 :.m .1 8.03: .0: 0:0 :0»
:0 :00» 0:0 80:3 0.2 »8 0:... .m 0:. 0. 880: a... »00 0: 030
.000. :0 :0.. 80.0: 0:0 2.. :00—mo: 0:: »08 :0» 0: 0.:05
80.80:: .00 0:: w:...0: 0: 880: »08 :.00:0 800 03 000:» 5..
0.0 0:: 0: 0w »00:085 »0:: 830:: 0:0 :0 50008 :. 805.000
0: 0>0: :0» 803 .00 .20 :. :03 ::0» :0w :0» 9:080:00
»00 0. 0.00 ..:2:03 5000 05.0: :0:? :00» 0:: 0: 0.:05
0: 2:05 . 80:0: 0 00 50.880800 0 :0.. 8080:: :. 805.000
03 :0:: 8.: 8:00:00 220 0 .00 0.0 0:: 0208
00 :0>0 :00 05 0. :0.:3 00:0 4055.0 0:. 8.05:0 9 :030: 05
:0» :0:.0:3 0:80.: w... 80:5 0: ...3 0>0: 0.:05 :05085 0:0 08080::
30:2 :.:00 0:: 005 0:0 0:: 8 :: 0: :0»: 080085 5.8055085 500. :0 0w 0: .00 0.0
2 80000000 30:2 »..00: 2:05 .. .»05 0:0 080:0: 0: :.0w 0: 0000: 805.000 0>0: 2:05 :. 080005
0.3:: :. 8.. 0:3 0.:00: .08.. 0:: 0>0: »05 0: 2:0 0: 220 80»: .80 05 800:5 0: H. .20 808000.:
..00:5 0:: 0:. 0: 0.:05 :0: 0.:05 2:05 8.5.0 080:0: =0: 0>0: 0.:05 80:00:00 05 0:: 00.000
0: 0.:05 :. 080:8: oz .. 28:: . 8:008m 80:05 0:... 0.005 03 80:00:00 0:... 0: 2:05 a 0.005 0:3
805.000 805.000
.:0 .:. 50::5 .80 0:.: 0:. 0208 0:3
0000088000: 080:0: 580:0: 0208 «800:5 580085 0:0
::0 0:: :0 :0::5 0:: 0:0 0w 0: .»03 500 0:0 080:0: 80:0: 0:: m.
0: :05... .000 0:: 805.3 803 ..5000 82:03 :0: 8m 580:0: :. 30:080.:
»0:... .0: 8080:: 080085 5. a 50:00 05 0:0 580035 8: 80 08080::
0:. I :0:: »05 .00 .20 0.0 0:: 5080 :0 =0 0>0: »0:... ..:.80< 008088000: .00 0.0
»0:: 0. 80:0: :. 800:5 0 30... 805.000 .220 805.000 05 80.08000 0208 :. 580085
0:. 5.: 000.: :00 :0» 580:0: .80 80:0: 0208 850:5 80:000: .8 5:208:00 ..0 808000.:
30: ::w.~. 2:00 0:00. 0:: 5... 05 0: :0 5.: 080:0: 0:0 580:0: 0000:3800 0:0 .:.80< 500.000 0:3
200 80:: .0_
2.03 I »N0.
_ m 052 . N 052 _ _ n52 . . n5< _ N 05: . . 05: _ N 05: 2 _ n5: _ 808.6 _

 

80:00:00. mBmfl>MmF7= AMZZOmmm: AOOIUm n20 X33004).

159

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

£850.80: :05 8.0 0:0»:0>0 .00 .:.0 0:: :.0:: 0.0: 5080.0 “8.08.800 0803 800:5 80g
0: m: 20: 0:0 :0:: 88:0» 080 800:5 :00: 0>.»0:: :.0:: :0 0:08 m:.>0: 0:: :0:: :00: 83.
.0880: 0:: :00» :.0: :0000800 8:000: =0 w:...0: 0:0 :0: 8.8800 00:8. 08:0 8030::
00:00 :0::08 0 003 080 8.00:: «880: »0:: :m:0:: .m .2 00:05:80 :0.>0:0:
0:: .0000: 80:80:: 003 0 003 0: 0>5:0:00 :0>0 00:05: 080 00:8. w:.0w :0
0: 5.3: 05 8:000: 8: 8080:: 0: 2:03 :.0:: 0>00. 80.80:: 0:: .0:0.>0:0: 8080::
00.080: 003 80.80:: .00 .:.0 0:: :0: :0::0:< 0: 803 :.800 :0 :00:00:0: :0 8:000: 805.000 .00 .:.0 0::
:. »03 0:: :0 .00 .:.0 0:: 0: :00::0: :00: 8:00am :00: 8: 800:5 0 0208 0: 8. 080085
8:000: 8: 800:5 008m 0>0: 0803 8030:: 800:0 :0 8:000: 0:: :0: 000m 0: 80:08.0: 55.8
0000.: :00: am :0 88 0:3 800:5 50%.: 50: 0:: 80:0: 0:: 0: 0803 80:0: :0 808000.:
0>0: 2:05 03 80:3 503 0 00: 03 0:: 0: 0.:03 5. 808000.: »: 808000.: 8080:: 0:0 080: 0008038:
0:3 800:5 800 8030:: 80:3 800 08030:: :0:: 800:5 :0 .0580: .00 .:.0 0:: 0:: 8. .8800 :0 888000
0 00: 03 ».:0 0:... 0:0 00: 03 8.3.85 0 8.08.800 0 003 0:0 8. 808000.: 00:: »:0> 088 0>.O
59858.88
.80 8.88:8
8:000:
80:0: 0::
:0 :: 0008
805.000
800: 0:
:m. 800800
0.8:... 0 2.:
2:03 2:05 .m .3. 8.
805.000 8550005 :0:
808000.: 0:0 »0:: :. .m
0:... 2.. 8. 08:0:
8050:: .00 :0: :: 50.2
.:.0 0:: 05:0 80:8 0:0
0: 8583 0 3 ..80:wo::
805.000 .00 .:.0
_ 08:2 0 0002 _ :82 . .05.: _ ~08 . :05: _ ~00: . :5: . 882.: .

 

80:80:00: m38>mmh7n AMZZOmMm: AOOEUm ”.0 0903.203.

160

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

03 8.0: 000 500:8:< .:000>.:08 :0 00:88.0 0:: 0. 0000.: 808 53...: 8::0:
0.00:: 80 .550.0 0.00... .:: :00:. :08—3. 0:0 80:: 80:80:00 :0::0 580:0:
50 :0:: 8: 03 0. 80.88::0: :.000 800:5 0.:03080: :. .::55000:5 5000: 2.5.0: 8m 00.000:
8.800000: 0:0 500. 0:: 8:000: 0. 80.0.8: 0: 0: 5850.0 :8:0:0
5850.0 0:08 0:: 30: 80:0 50008 :07. .550.0 0. 00:0:0 0 0>0: 0 ..0 8:...0: 08:0. 0 0>0:
:0 m 800.0: 00808. 5:00::0 :8: :. 8000:.00:0: 50550.0 0:08 800:5 5850.0 :.000 03 8: 0800.800.
5. 800:5 08 :00:. 5.: ... 580:0: :0: :0 m 8:...0: 0 008:0: :0..085 .580005 ..0 :0..08 0::
0 :. .:05088 0: :0:000: 0>.5:0:50: 600000000 580088 :0::0: 0.. 8: 0. 0: 0: :003 000.: 0.000 :0 808000.:
:000 50008 8005503 -:0: :00: 000000000 000.800. . 0:3 580088 03 :. 00.: :0: 0.00000:
:0 0.00. 03 0:: 0: 0.00. . 000 500:8:< .50008 :00: 000 50080 0 0:0 50080 ..0::0:0: :.08 0: 0.003 :. 0:: 5. 8:3
808::
58030:: .00 .:.0 0::
000000000 0. 580085
00: :0 03:00 00:00:00 .::0 80.::0:0
5 =8: 02 88% .508: .0030
80:: 8:000: :0 808000.: 000 0800: 880:0.» 0::
00::0000 0:... I 0000.: :0: :005 580:0:
:.00:03 :0:... 5. 0.30 :.0:: :0:: ..03
080:0: 00800.8: 808080008 :. 00::0: 05 80.00 :0
80 :00 0. .80 ..000: :0800 0.:00 :0:3 000:0 800:5
80:0: 0:: 8: 2.00: :.000 . 80880.: :0 8:80: 0000.:
.:.5.> 0 00.08 8: 08030:: 80:0 80.003000 800:5
000 8080:: :0.>0:0: 0000585 808000.: 8:00.".
0:: :0 0.00. 00>.0>:. :0:: 50 :0:5 0:: 50.080 8080:: ..00:8 :00::
0: :0::08 0:: 5800 0805 .080: 0:: 0. 0:0 580:0: .00 .:.0 0:: 0. 0 503 :. 0:03
:08 0: 00.:: 0:0 80:... 500000>:08. 8: 8080:: 0.30 :.0:: :0 8080:: .00 00.8080:
03 8080:: 080085 00 0: 0.:03 .00 .:.0 808000.: 0:: .:.0 0. 0000.: 5.80:0:
.00 .:.0 0:: 0000800 :0::0:< 0:: 0. 0000.: :0 0000::0:8. 8.8080 8: 8080::
0: :0::8:00 .8008 0: 0: 5803 0:: 80.0:080: 580085 .00 .:.0 0: 08
:0: 80.008 .:.0 80 00.0: :.05000 00:03:08 800:5 < 580:0: ::.3 :0 00:02.8. 0: 500050888
80:0 :0: 000.83 :. 8: 8080:: :0: 5. 0.30 5000080800 00: 0 0>0: 00:00:0m
. 0 05:2 _ N 052 _ : 052 . : 05... _ N 05: . : 05: H N 05: . : 05: . 808:0 _

 

3000.800: 83m..>~.m....7: ANZZOmMm: 48:08 .:O EMF/:.0:

161

 

 

 

85 :38

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Efiw 9 083
03 b 888.0
28 v 08:
03 course“:
888 05
8 88.5
.88: $8
.885 was: 88866.8
SE .85 05 2 8 :8
x8: EB 0:8: £8
88 2688 “208:8
05 E “8:85 05 8888
05 85 08: S 8 28
n8 .m .m 0:8: £8
05 9 805 8:88 05 .883
88 EB 8888 m a 8 85
o? :8..on $8588 82.? 888
.8 .:a fig 0: 3 838 .038
05 8 :85 2 80an 3 mama» £5 02>th
8.x: r86 05 8.8.. 3: m_ 3&0: who—08:8
03 .8>u8_o 03 .8888 8 8088 :8 Bo...
2: 868a 2 8:88 8:83 demm 8 oufi
Sn 88088 “828 a 28:88:. w:=8::8
85 mfimfl fl 8:0 898:: Bow 8 8: 85
on? :8an 3092: 05 8 8.9.83 53, 883cc
8 08: 03 8 8888 o 955 $5.888
.= 489.88 2 8: $885 82w 88:
2 8:3 03 8:82 .29— .85 88:8 05
68 .8323 85 be 8m $2 “:08 080 .88on “:82?th
8 x02 88 a 08 88,—» “how 38:3 .8858: .8 .:m 8 on 9 26:88:—
_ m 82 _ N 82 _ _ 82 _ _ 8< _ N 8: T _ 8: b N am: _ _ 8x a 8:85 _

 

Asset—50v mBmHN/mmPZH 4mZZOmMm—m AOOEUm m0 Nay—.:::

162

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:o 32 8mm
88 89‘
8 838:
05 95
8:8: 3:
“.:o: 85.
.882:
.8 a?
05 80327.
“.:::
3.: 82:5
05 3 2:8
:8: 5.; 28. men: W
53393: $053388 :8 Bo. mic:
:o 5352, 0: mm 22:. .88an 3 838:
53085 .:8 on 2:03 8:68: 5:5 .8 .:a
GEMS: .830: 88: :8:on 8853.9. :8 5 385:8
o5 ton—:8 8: 8 85 .8 .:: fl :8on mica—q :8
.N a r988 888% fit 05 $5.58 .8 .8 05 @5582
.m 8 i=3 2: as: 85:5 -8 .«o hon—8:: :wE a 83 85 5b: 85 :8 biota
.N r: .5328 9.3 2:8: 2: 4 a. a 2,2 03 z a .82.: 852:6 :o N 58¢. 8.5::
8 N a .88 98:88 85 05 55 a: brat: 95 .m a 508 P: :3: a 8: M: £83 .8 :55 .098
m: 5:8: 5 :55 x55 _ 5:8.— 5 3:85:83— »:aoammfium 852.: 05 E 9 8o: 03 .m 05 mm 855
“88:.
05 9 58
03 8508
w 9 e 9:8
mm “8:::
a b 83.83
a 8:88
w on 2:03
N82 _ N8: 5 5m: _ .08 H N8: _ 5m: _ N8: _ 58 H 8:85

 

A8::u:oUv m3m=>MmFZ~ AMZZOmmm—m AOOIUm m0 NEH;

163

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000.0000 00.0 $00.00? 0000000000. 05 00.0 00:80 00 000
m. 0. 0.03 000 0000 8.20000. 00.. 0000300 05 03 8.0.0.6200
0000000. 05 m. 00. 00000 m0.>.w 00000 80.30 00 00 0000
30.00. 0.00000 0.0 300. 3000. 000 8.00.. 00.0 850005 03 0.00000»
00.08000 0.000 03 000 00.3 000. 003000 00 0000000.
05 6.003 00.0 0. .00>.0>0. .00 80.00000 05 8.0000000 05 00w
00 :5 .80 00 00 00 00 0000 0.0003 .8808 00 0. How 000
0000000000000 0>0: 00000000 «00.08000 0000 000.3 00 00000 0000000 05
00.000 00.0 00:. .w .m .2 000 .m .0000 00.3 .m 0. 00.0000 0000 000 0.000 00.0
0 0000000000 0.00000000000 .2 0003000 00......80080 080080 07. 0. 09000000000 0. 0000on 0000000020
@0003 000 08.0.. 0.00 00.0 00 0. 00000000 .00 .000 000 00000000
.8008 90300000. .00 00.0 0.00 0000. 00 000.0000 .00 .000 00.0 00.0 0. 0000.0 00.. 80.000
0000 "000050.. 0.00 000 0>02. 0000800 05 0.000080 00 0. 000000020 00. 00 006.000 000000
0000000000. 20.08000 00 >00. 00.0 0000 0000000000. 000.. 0000000 05 000.0 0.0 ..0 0.00
00 m. 0.00 03. 080080 07. 00.0 0.0.... . 80.08000 0.80.2.0 000000. 0 0. 8.0.0.000... 00.0 a. 000.3
2.0.0
00.0 0000.
00 m0.0w 0.00
0.00. 00003
08.000008 0.00000on
0000 03 .00 .00
5.00000000 0. 00000000.
00.. 00 8.00.0 000
805.5000 00 8.0.0.0000.
000. 0000000 0000 00.00.00
m m m 00 00.0» v < m < m < m < 0.00.0005
000 0B 0. .n < .0008 000 00
0.000.... 000.3
.0003:
80000000000.
05 000,000
_ N 0.02 b N 080 _ 0 002 . 0 08 _ N 08 . 0 08 0 N 08 . 0 08 _ 8.08:0 _

 

300000000. m3m0>mm2 AWZZOmMmm AOOIUm mo Nahum—2

164

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.088 8: «82.8 8 .5 :8 8888 o:.. :83
.:o :8 05 8 m< .:o 920w r8: 9 @9830
22888 .m 28:3 :58 o? .to m: 8.03
.m 05 2 :0>0 is 28 :82 :0: 8:. 88 .:NN :BaU:
22:92.58 :8 5:2: 05 82:. 03 a 2 8 .288: .582
ES a 88 88: 888.com 0? Samoa :23 8:85 2228:
2 882.8 822:5 Ho: :85 228 05 :58 32.8 05 o:
a 2 85. 2 228.58 88888 95 8:88.: o: 2 80:... .m 28:8 2.8.:
.28 03 8:3 05 838.85 :88». 82» 22:28:88: .8Em so 88:
:0 228.58 2 mat—£8 2 8:88 8: 0.3 .35. 28 mo :8 88:28 8089028
.m .2 83 228.58 :8 3:8 69582 825.8: 05 05 9220: 2.28%
05 8038: 2:5 03 .35 t .0:. 8: :23 E283 85 28% .2508
88:22.8 .88 2:8 2 8:288 :88 288.: 025.8: r8: :8 8.5.22 812.88 05
o: 2 80:2. 05 :o 8 22: 05 .3 .:M88 88 a 2 085 2888 :2: 20:. EB EB .3 8m :8: ~88:
$8 3 08: 22888 322 3:28 :88 5.828 S: 88: -8 win—o: 85 8589 8:28:25 .8 .:a 05
228.58 .m .2 2 .2508 8:83qu 05 :88 2:: :82 8 .8 .552: .8 .2828 22.. .2 2828
.m .2 05 05 :a S: .8 :88 :0 2:2 .:wsohu 8 ha 03 :88 03 85 9 8...: 82: -8 3:82 8 22.78 829
8:3 83> 22888 83 2828 30:8 8 .8868: 2: 28a: 2:: a E2838 2.8588 :8 :88
{.28 288 .m .= 8:3 05 9:82.: 2 825. .8: 8: 2 : .8“ 8m x 05 3% mo :8. 8 88 win:
.m .3 05. 305. rue: _ 0.8 03 2825.89 Eamoa 0:.H was: 8: 03 o? 2 can: a 2 805. main; 2
.88.: 3
use.“ 35
.2 8888
20:
E22 523
.8888 8829—8:
0:. mafia: 2:2 .82on
8 28:8 05 322 o:: wave—=05 22888
20:88 0:... 03 .2288: v8 2.:
.888 05 0:2... 2:8 9::on .8 2 823828
8322 0:3 03 82o .:a 05 .88 88:08. .888: 25
_ m 82 _ N 82 _ _ 82 2 _ 8< _ N 8: _ _ 8: H N 8: fl _ am: _ .5880 _

 

£82589 m3~fi>mmh7= AMZZOmMm—m AOOmUm ”—0 E;

165

 

«Marga

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.8523 9:— m.: .m
82 has “7.5“ a? 023888.
ooh g «68: 0:5 :waoco 93
0:3 805 So 28% “.58 33.6 .50 E
.83 33%.—go mesh .095 55 3:805
05 305— .5. 25303 m_ 98—88 93 03 6:5
9 bags uoom Mao—3.5.8 5:25 022. 25E Euu
So 88% SEE race 2? rec“. 03 Town Sons 8mt28==oo
mEH ..nnsm icon 0? .:oon 463 Eon< 25v Son< .:on :53. women 53¢. m_ z .m .m E 05 fl .23
.32th
E3
w===8§
5 33:3:
208
too: 03
.3525” 05
.:fl ..8 mooEom
25 .m .m 05 toga—a
£8..on 9 cm :55 B. 0: 8a 22,—.
.8382.” Ex >52 to Sufi Sons
a 2:5 “.58 gov—«E 03.5.: 033583
:0» .205 8: of. .25 mm :33
mm 3.88 05 05 E 53 .3535
b .589? 05 a 2.5.3. 083
83.6 83 :.om 805 05 550 95
5:02 .62 “or. $.38 .838 :83
En 3-30:8 .owaa 083 a: 28 03 2:3 05 .38
93 Son 05 no on was an 08 .EEEFSU
uncoEEoooM 2 ha =5 25 m: :2:— .35
.30» $2.2. 23 8283 £05 068
_ m 82 _ N 82 4 fl 8: F _ 03 N 8: _ 8: N am: _ am: 8:85

 

32.5308 man>MmFZH AMZZOWMm—m AOOEUm m0 X53222

166

 

5:3 .8:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 22. 2.:
26: £526
:3:on
do 4.:
o::. :5:on
do .::
add. on: S :85
ozmmoawa :omo: 3 wfiow
850 :0: EL :2:
:23 328 .338: .85an
a E $33.3: 2: .:o to: .:o .2
2:: on bog—03a a o>£ :35 matouo:
335:: a 2:27. :35. : .mEoBoE 22:82:
26: 2 9:0» $552: .8338: 3:30de 8: o::
m: dd. o>._.a: .9538: o: 5:: :88: .::oEoooE :0 down: :3: oz:— 8:3:qu
d5 8::: 8323 m: :0::83 .:o So do_:: 2:: ode 9 wEom o:: d5: .wfifiwc
o5. .oEmdao: mEEB o>dawoz on #5165 o>._ Etouo: $2 6.3.}: .mmEd 5S:
o5 3 dong: o:: .35 a :55 2E2. boar“. :23: 2338—8 9:238:
Bo: was 2:5 35 0d :.58 o. 5:53: 88an :a m: :8:on doom—a on :25:
:5 .9538: moi. £8: mfiaa: 8238:: do .:: on: 9 8m 93.35 .::oEoooa
o::—98:: 30.86:: a fi done: was Soda: .8 x55 ..Sd .mdfl 9o: Eod
d5: 9 :o: :o 29: x83 d5: o5 : 8:83 32. o3 328:: a: :53 :9» .2 o: :83:
29 8o? 25 3 23: on o::o: .:ofi .m .3 2: mo 5 mfiuow Sm .8538: a 8: m:
downs: 3.5 2 dogmas: .:o 8:83 So :85 :ow fl d5 .m .3 o::—38:: wEZEBfi—z N60362:
:5:on 2: mm same: 3850:: 3 :9: doom:— 3 mfidoooosm :33 :.:0d dobomo: .::oBoa 82:83:
553 :98: do .:: 2F 8::—Bad 3:51.05 m: .595. >2: 35 23. on :o: 2:27. 35.38% o:: E :98:
a 8: fl .2: :8 :88: o:: mdfi 2:8 3:33: a : .53 mm..— Eana «E298: on: a «:5an
3:986 .02 8.3:: a u...— .bo::¢oa .onuoEom o>.~ 35 82 do .:: 2F o:=&85 :o 353:: : o:::mofld o:<
d5?» o:::—
a :0 d3 dSB
_ m 82 _. N 82 _ om: : Um< N 8: : 8: N am: _ am: 4 .5380

 

62.5308 m3m=>mmh7= Am—ZZOmmm—m AOOIUm m0 Vagaxz

167

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 0: 28:0 8.00800 .:03 0: :.:0:
2.3 000.00 a: 20 :20 = .0 .:
08.00880 :. .80000000 :. 808000.:
82:08.8 0. :0: 0. :..:0 b08080:
:. 808000.: 80.. .:: 0x00 0 :0 805
:0.. 0.80.8 :0:: 80:88 8: 0:00..
00.5.0: 0 :30 8 0>0: 0.83 .8000: m. :. :03
.8. 0 0: :.00:0 :.00:0 8:: :. I 00 .00 0:0: :.:0>0:
.:0.0.00: 305. 03 8: 08:... 080:0: 808000.: .0:: 05 0>0: >05 ::0 :..:0
:0:: 00.08 885.088 5.3 80800 :0:.0w0 :0: :.00:0 00.0.0.8 05 :0 8.0.00.
80.80:: .:0 0: 0.00: 0:: 305. 80:60:“. .00 :00: 080:0. 0 0. :0.0.00: 0:.03 .. 8m.
.:.0 05 3 0w ..0 80:: 03w 03 :0:: 8: 0:02 0. 80:0: 0:: 808000.: .0:: 05 .:080a00:
0: 80:80 0 0: :00: 03 0... 08000:: 808000... .. 80.0.00: :. 5.0.00: 00.08 0: 80:. 0: 9 0:00:
00:0,. :00 03 80:0: 0:: 0:08 :. 8.00:0. 808000... .08.. 0:: 8.30:0 8: :..:0 :.0:: 0808000.:
08:: :.:0:. 0: 80.00: 3:00 :.000 0:08 0: .0:... 0:: 0>0: 200:0 .:0.:00:0>:00 w:.::0w0: :0. 8.0.00:
.:0.0.00: 8.0.. :0.... 03m 03 :0.; .8: :.00:0 8.80.: 0>0: 200:0 0.80.0888 0:: .0 ::0: 0: 8.0.00: .0:: 0:. 00.08
0 0: 0: 00: .. 0: 0>0: 00> 508.003: .00:00 0: ... 8.80.: 0:... 0: ... :00 080:0: 0.80:0: 200:0 0:3
00:80.0
:.0:: ..0. 0:3 000.0 :.
0808.8 :0.0: 3:080:82.
£5.00; 03 .:0:00.::. ::0
80000.0 0:00. .003... 05 8080208.
00000.0 0:08 0. 030.308. .0 0.00.
:0 v .8 m:...0. .8008: 0.83080: 0:20.00:
080:80 >2 0:00:80 :. 88:8 :0: 808000.:.
0:: 00.0 0... 05 80:0 .00:0::0:0 8080.00.80 0:: :0
.:0.0.00: 0:880 ::0 30:008.. :00: .000008 . ::0 80:8. :0:...
0.80:0: :0.:0>.:08 30:0. 0.80:000 00:0.5 .m .... 00.80880 80.0.00: 0:080. 8.88
05 0... 0:. 0.8:. . :0:? 0.: 8.000.. :02 0: :0 w:.>0$. 8.80:00< ...8..:m 0.80:0: 0:... 05 0:0 :0:?
08030::
.0 0:80. 0005
0 00.2 _ N 002 _ : 002 . _ 00< . N 00: 4 : 00: . m :0: . _ :0: . 8002.0 .

 

628.800. m3m.>~.m....z. ..mZZOmmmn. AOOEUm 0.0 ungaaz

168

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0:: $35: 05 0.00:: 0: 2:00 a 05 E @0003 :05 62:60: 50:09 2:03 Emma:
0300: 05 0:: .3838 .830: :5 .3353 0: o: 800: 05 0&9: 2:5 058 v5 .:0 .::
5:03: 05 ca: 03 h .0»: .:: :33 220 :05 3 :030: 05 0o .::—:0:: :0 E 8:095:
03:00: :0:: E00» v :03 E050 0:; 35 3:03: :0>E 0:: 9.3 :05 300.: :.mea
@502: 33 z 6000.: g :0:: Bo: 38.002: :0: o: 030 :0:: 05 0: 8 0:: 3:095. mo E08002:
E :o: :5 m2:— 0:o:: :2 :0::0: :02: :8 8::—02:» on 2.5:: ::0:::m>:0::: 088 :8 $008:
.w:_©u:02 a on 2.5:: v: a demo: 0 ::0 3:35 03 $50.33 05 30:: o: .btoEE wig—.:::
5 no“ Bow 0:05. .:o: 8 wife? ,0: 058% :00: :0: m: z .30: 025:8 03 :55 5300:
a a: 03 .oz .02 $8230 3000:: 0:... ESEm—g 03 m_ z :33 05. a .088 :ot a :8 3:0 05 m—
.m
.z 2: :0::050:
L 05
:0:? 88:50
a 0m: ::m
.::08: 05 8
a: 0: 2:05
E08002:
:8 83:00:
05 .033
am 05 a: ::o
9:025: wEEoo :0:?
:8 ::0: £83080: ::0:on
v: :23 305. EN 05
£30260 :5 5 a2: .:0 .:a
452%: m: .B .:: 2:. .:: :82:
39: :08: 05 :_ :00:—a 0: 2:2:
02:26:00 0: 6:8 309::
coca >05 :05 05 :05
_ m 82 g N 82 _ _ om: _ : 09: _ N 8:: fl : om: _ N am: _ _ am: _ 8325 _

 

3055808 m38>mmk7n ANZZOmmmm AOOEUm "—0 N35;

169

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..o 50:980.. :0::08880. m: 30:: ::0 0.... 03 0.5... :m .93... .0:... :05
0>uaw0: 05. .0:: 32.0030 no _ $5.5 ..o :o> .8039... E ton—::0 :0:: :o
.826: 0.: am: .0 0.0:... Ewen—x0050 0080:0880 ..00 .:.0 0.: 0.8.: :00: 32:25:00
3:08.. wfizw =.. 00.0.: ::0 .:::00 .::...“ :_ :00:... 0: 0:900:3— ..o 00:: 05
8: mo 0.50. 03 .3000... 05 $800.5 5:350 EB :0» ..m 9:03.. w:_a000_ .0:: N00008:
E .0506 0... 9:03: E08003: .::..woa :0... :m :o .2 E wEE... ::0 0:900:60 0:208:00 E08002:
89¢ 03.05. 53. «.:: 05 :m 0.5 06 :00—0.... : .::.0 3:08.. 0:. :0» .2 .0:. 503.0: :0 60:8 082.: 0.: 035::
03:. 300: :8_::E:.8 058 0: 9 0:05.55... .0:: 3:038. b.9353. 98ng88 5.3 208.0 8 0.00:. 2:8
:5.on 0.; 082 0:00: 0:05. 0.: .3 3.5.8:. 0: 9 0.000: = .080 $2.53 00w::._0 :23
.53
m. o::: =
mate—00:30
0:. .m .2
E .:: 6.00%
so 05 E
:0::0E0::_
8.00.500
.380003 :0.—.80
0.5.: :00: 03
0: 2:95 .:o:..fi0>:8
:8..on .::...moa .. .m:_.
60 :0 05 60 .:: a... .::..woa
53:85.00 0... o. :0>0 ..00 .:.0 0.:
0... wfiow m. on... 8 cm 9 0.000:
:_ d... .8 $2 305. ..:o: 220 :0... 0:800:
::0 .:::on . 00:50.:8 8:03.. :0: 308 :8
05 .:::a .:o w_ Bo: Emu 9:033 .m .m 05 .0
ovaw aw 9.0.5888 o: .:.0 03 :.0: o. ::0 >30. 9 .::B
.5300: 0.: .0 0.83.. .030: :00: 5.. .883... 03 :0 wEo: 0... 8:000:
50.502: 0.0.: 9.0.300. 03 «.050: 60 .:.0 .0: 0:: 03 o: :00:... .o: 0:. $50.8;
_ N 82 _ N 82 _ . 0m: _ . om< _ N 8: _ . om: _ N am: _ . am: _ 8325 _

 

602...:09 mBmH>mmPZH 4mZZOmMm—m AOOIUM m0 NEH;

170

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.882:
0:: 30:08
E08002:
:0: 2:080
088: 0::
830:0: :0
8:82.800 88.80:: .:0
.880» :8 .:: 0:: 8 80:
N :00: ::0: E08002: EN 8 :880:
8:. 080m :0: 2:080 :88 :0»
03:8: 38:0: .Cuom 888003
0: 0: 8: 8 0: 0. 0:8 .0: 0.8
8880:: 0:... 8:98:80: :0» .:: ..m .m
.020. =:: 0: 0:: 8.83 : 0:. 0: 8::0: 808::
0: 8: 880: 0:82:88 :80 :0: 0.: 8:2: 0:
8880:: 0: :. 8:800: 02:. ._::mm000:m :00: 03 :8
2:03 #500: 820 8:88.. 08 5.20:8:
088:0 0: : 41:: .::—5:08.: 8880:». :0» :_ .80» 80:8: 0:08
8: 8880:: ::0: 3:08: :8 :0 :0_. _ :80. 8 :0: :00: 03 .80
.:0 :8 0:: .:: 8: .80 80:00:: 0:08 MO :8 88: 8880:: 0:: 8:::088000:
N 08. _ N 08. P . 08: b _ 08 F N 08 _ . 08 _ N 08 _ . 08 _ 888d _

 

30:88:00: m38>mmh7n AMZZOmy—m: AOOEUm m0 X3332:

171

 

000800 8: .::080
0.0:: 08080::

0:8 :0: 0: 80:8:
80:00 88:000.:

:0: ”8800000
::0: 0: :0:0: 008

.080 0020 8:080
0:002 08030::

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:0:: 82:0: 0 8:0: 002: .:0: :80 ? .E0::0:: 88:08:88
0.0:: .808002: ::088000: :0: 0>:0::0:0 0:: 08030::
.8: ::088000: :80? 8: .:002: 8 80:80 0.: 002: 0058030
:0: :80 ? 0: :800 80:8: b:0:0:: :800 00> 00: 80:8: 8:008:00 .: .:
880:0: 0::
:::00::00 :0 ::0?
.:::00880 :0:: 0:80 88:08 0>:0::0:0
08080 8088000: 88:08:88 0:: 8 808002: 88:08 038888
.0>::::0:: :0 :83 0: ::088000: 0.: 0: 80:0:
0: 880:0: 0:00 Z 88:8: :0: :80 ? :000 58880300
:0:: .808002: 0>:0::0:0 8030:: 0:80:80 ::=:::.::
:0: ::088000: 0.: :0: 0:08:50 :0.: 8030:: 8030:: 880:0: 080:8:
:0: :80? 0 0: :08 80:8: 880:0: 0 :0 0:02 0 :0: 0: 80:80 0::. :0 8003 .: .:
.:0: :0::
::0 .: .:: 88:0: .000:00:0 03000000,: .80::0::
0:: 8 0:0:000: .80::0:: 0>:0::0:0 .:0 0>:0::0:0
:0: :00—00 ::0: .3308: 0.: 8:002: :80: 0:: 0: 80:80
:80? _ .00:0:: :0: :0: ::::8 a: 0:880 0: :80: 0.: :0:0: :803
0:0:0>0 0>0:0 000020 8:08: :0: 0: 8823: : 2:03 8080020
:0: 0.0:: .80::0:: .:0:0>:08 :0: 0: 08:80:: 0: 8 3208:
00:30 00:20:00 80:8: .80::0:: 80:8: 0820:0000. :0: 8080::
0: :0: :0:0: 0>:0::0:_0 :80 > 0: 880:0: 880:0: 0 :0:
:80 ? 808002: 0.: 8 808002: .80::0:: 0>:0::0:0 .000020 : :88:
:0: ::088000: :0: ::088000: 0:: 8 808002: .:::88000 ::0: 080:8:
:0: :80 ? :80 ? :0: :0:0: 8: :80 ? 0: 80:80 0:: 8:0: :0 :00:— .: .::
: 8:0:00: _ m 88:00: _ N 88:00: _ : 8:0:00: _ :0::008: 80:0: _

 

< 8:0:00: 8:02

172

 

88:00:00 080: :0:

8000—508
0:0-:0-0:0 0:08

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:0w 4103:5000 80808 0888080 808088080
8 .:: .00:0:0 0 0:: 8 :0808 £00008
:0: 080 80880:: 0 :83 :0 :0: 0803 8:080 00002
08:0 00:03:00 :0m .8888 80:00 .80 8:00 08 .80: 0:08 00002
.8888 880:0: 080m 0000: 0:m :0: :0000: 0 0.08:9 8080.8 0888080
0 :0 8: 0: 0: 0000: 80808 088808 80808 0888080 05 8 8080008
0:: 8: 8080008 0:: 8 8080008 0:: 8 8080008 :0.: :0.: 80080 0::
00088000: 080 3 80 08: 8: 080 >9 00088000: 080 3 00088000: 080 3 8:08:00 .m .E :2
800:0
::00 0:0 8800000:
0: 0: 0000: 0:m
.800» N 8 800:0 0: .8080008 .80 8000
88:00 :0 :800: 05 :00: 0:: 0.8:: 8::: :0:“ 4:08:08:
0: 888 880:0: :.:00 H 8: 8080.8 :.0: 80.808 80:88
8: 80808 0888080 05 0888080 08 80:0 0 :0 88 8»: ::0—0
880:0: 0 8 0:m 80:0 080:0: :0.: 080:0: 8:08: :08: :0 8008:
800:0 00800 02 80:3, 8000009, 8:03 8005008 0:: :83 ::0?
.:000:w 50 :00» 0.8 0:82 000008 08080 0: 850:: 80808 0888080
0 0.0:m 8080008 .:0 8 00298 0 8503 0 08m 08 0: 80080
:0.: 8000888000: :0: :00 8080008 80808 0888080 0:: :0.:0: 8: 080 >9
000w 0:088000: 0:: 8 8080008 80000000 880%
0 0: 0803 8:9 8: 080 3 :0: 8.8: 8: 080 3 :0.: 80080 0:: 50.: 8:08:00 .m .m
0088:: .0803
00008808 0: .:: 000: 0800 80808 08008080
88:08:00 800% :0.: w80:0:0 80080 :w:0:: 00 05 8 8080008
8:0: 88 08080.8 8:0 80:8 880: 00:00:88 :0.: 000:088000:
_ v 8:0:00m _ m 8:0:00m fl N 0:0:00m _ : 8:0:00m _ 8.8080: 80:0m a

 

880800 < .8500 802

173

 

30:8 05 008330
:.0:m .8080003

8030.3
:0 80.00 0 0030.3

80.303. 0388003
06 8 8080003

007. 0003 00:08m

80.303 30083—0

 

 

 

00088800 8:2 .8080003 .83 000880000 05 8 8080003
8: 030 3 00088008 030 3 8: 030 3 00088008 030 3 w 8:08:00 .m .2
90: >08 08m 000:0
08030.3 :0:—08m 8030.3
830:0: 80: .8 3.8308: 830:0: 0 8:
000000: 8080003 808 00 3. 600008000 000m
8.: 000880000 .8000me 080 .8303 0388020 £0803 86003 82
8: 0303 330803 80-000 0000: 0:m 05 8 8080003 8080.3 03008003
80080. 00.0 .8080003 8.: 00: 8.: 000880000 05 8 8080003
83 00:03 05 :0 00088000: 030 3 8: 030 3 00088008 030 3 N. 8:08:00 .m .2
80800880
.m .E 003000: 80:080. 0 8 800000
05 8 3:83:08 8.: 5388330 80303
800800 00000 83 020 830:0: 0 82
3:0: 803% 80303 80.303 02008020 80803 038803
8: 0303 80.303 80 008800 0 05 8 8080003 8.: 05 8 8080003
03008003 0:3. 8 00202: 00: .00 000880000 030 3 .83 08088000.—

.w::08:00 0000:

 

80803 3008003

 

.wQUe—Omnw o>mmmooxu

 

$5030 0.00000

 

 

 

 

0:m .8080003 05 8 8080003 .8 00:88 0: 3: .8080003
000880000 83 00: 00088000.— 05 :83 800 00000000 33030
80 0303 8: 0303 00 0:0» 0>0: 030:m 83 80080 05 000.:. 0208000 .m .2
f v 080000m _ m 03800m ~ N 080005 _ : 00.0005 _ 380803 30:0m _

 

820.58 < c.5880 0.522

174

 

 

.32 can .8“ 82¢
a mafia mo owns:

 

.38an
8323 .«o 8:83

 

 

.wcfluoa
8: can momma—o
3:8 .92 :5

 

 

 

 

F

v ogcoom

_

m 2.5—50m _ m ouncoom _
€025.88 < 2.8:on 5522

~ ogcoom _

.occoflom .oocom

_

175

 

0 00: 8080001180

.2 8 8 05 8080008

00088000“ 8080008

000.80 25 8080008

 

 

 

 

00088000.. 8: 283 80880000 8: E83 8.: 000880000 8: 283 80880000 8: E83 2 8:00:80 .m .m
.80: >08 00000.0 00:08.0.
580800000 8080
8: 0.0:m .0>00 .8 8:
8m 8 0000: 3008.05 0 00008 0.0:m .m .2 8
$85808 82:00— 080308 0800 00: 0.0:m
80:88 00808080 000008 0800000 80308 830:0: 0 82 80088 08088—0
00 80 8080008 m 00:08 8080008 08 00020000 800 8080008 05 8 8080008
000880000 283 80880000 8: 283 80880000 283 80880000 283 2 8:00:80 .m .3
00808030
9 0000—00 8000 080—85
80.808 08080020
8080008 088.: 05 00 :0>0 88.08008 8
80 8:: :80? 0.: 080800 80 0.0: 0.0088 80808.88
.888: :50 00: 280 00800 000H .:0003 00 .80: >08 00000—0 00:08m 8208 0.0:m
0: 00:0 000088 00800 00: >8 8 80 05 00 82 8030.8 880:0: 0 82 .m 8080.8 03008003
000,—. 8080008 8.: 08 Pm 8080008 08 .2 8 0088.05 8080008 0:0 8 8080008
000880000 80 28>» 80880000 8: E83 08 000880000 28? 000880000 8: 283 _ 08008m 8 =00Q .m .m
.00 2080.20 8.: >208 .90: E83
>08 0: :0.Q.. 880w 80808 0808008
:80 E0: 8283 05 00:0 8:380 880008
0.0: 000088 08:0000 0.0: a .m .m 8 8: 0>02 800080 30080 08 ..m .m 05 8 00:
h .0008» 08 $800080 0.: :0.Q: 88:08:08 0000 9 803 >02 030000 0>02 0.: .>=00_80_0000
0: 280 02,—. 80000 8: 8383 8: 0.0: >00 0: 0: 000088 00800 000.2. .m 0880 0880 88.8

S: 0 000 000000:< 008.0
8080008 830080
8&0 s0 03 0.0

 

80:88 E 000008 08 8
8283 0.0: .2: 8080008
80 00088000.. 283

 

.m 80 .m .2 8 00000—0 080
0800000 :00—Em 8080008
80880000 283 _

 

0.0:0 00E 0080: 0:m
8080008 8.: 80080
80880000 8: E83

 

 

wan—£35m .«0 50h— .m .=

 

 

0 2.00008

H m 200008

_

N 0:00:03
m 2.00805 0802

2 0:00:08 fl

:0.—808m 80:0m _

176

 

80000800 300%
808 380.308 0 03 >08
08 88% m8. 26%

 

 

M80803 0.0: 000038 .003 .8 8208 .«0 008080

00800.0. 000,—. 008008080 8 00800808< 80307. 0 00..— 0E 00000—0 8:080 .888 8080 03 0303

8008 008 022 8080008 08000 0: 8080008 00008 022 8080008 8 0330 2 8080008
08088000.. 008 0303 080880008 0303 080880008 0303 080880008 0303 2 80308890 .m .2

000380 80:03 w880w 080

05 500803 80 w80w 00008 80: .80308 0 8

880080 0.0033 3080. r800 80% 008008080 80: 80808

808808 808 .3 080 8030 :3 908000 000: 803888 0.0 8030 80: :00 0303

80:00 000.008 00% 05 00 032 800 80 > .00— 83 80808 003008080

00» 80.08800 8000088 05 83080. 80383 080 8080008 05 8 8080008
030 803080 008 05 030 803080 3:008 0.800 _ 808 08080008 0303 08088000.. 008 0303 _ 80308800 .m .2

.80308 .m .E 05 .0 808880

000003 8:3 mm

080 80308 008008080
80 00: 0: 8080003
80.3 08080008 0303

.m .2 05 8 808880 00008

03 £803 08 830 80
030800 0.0m 8080008
08088000.. 008 0303

8030803 0 002 .208 080.80
-080 0808 0000 Z .m<m2

8 m_0>0_ 808080080
30.0mm 8080008

80.3 08080008 0303

0800 00008 23 .03 830
03 0. 08000 :3 080308
0800 8308 80

008000 05 8080003
080880008 008 0303 H

80.008800 .m .3 .:<

 

 

.80308

008008080 80 .08 080
83 80808 03008080
05 8030 3080.

380808 .2 0.2 .0803
05 00 800 0: 80308
008008080 088.30

 

.80308 0 8 808003002
80000 .3 808 0

80350 080 080808 53
8300 80 08 0083008
008 0.03 000.003

50 20 5 0.0 0508 .m

 

080080 05 808 :00

080 0008800 0 80 80080
05 0008 080 380808

05 883 0002 00000—0
080m 0008 0» 888m

.32 080 008000 n00.32 .m
.2 8 023885 80800800
330% 80.3 80000

 

.03
830 8 :3 008008080
8008 008 03m 0000080
0800 0>0: 00 880%

0.08.0. 83 5808 08: 0 80

 

 

 

 

0 080808

3

m 080800m

_

N 080800m

_

0820.500 0 0.5380 0.502

_ 080800m

_

3880808 _0030m

_

177

 

0808008

800 08 00 0008 000m 0
80m. 08 00008 0m .5830
08 8w 0.0: .88080008

80308 0
08 00800808< .8080008

80308 8030808 0 802
.0008 so 0080 8300 080w
0>08 000080 805300-808
8008.5 0 0.08 ...0.U.. m 008
08 88088 80>m .8080008

880008 0.080
8808 0888 2. 8080008

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

808 08080008 0303 080880008 0303 080880008 0303 080880008 88 0303 8 808008800 .m .2
.8080008
0 0880800m _ m 0880800m _ N 0880800m _ 8 0880800m _ 808800808 80080m w

 

8080.800 8 0.8880 8002

178

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000000 00.0 00020002 00.0000 0000020 000000 00.0 00020002 0000000
.200 a. .200 020 .200 9.0 .200 020 200020 .200 a. .200 0.

8.8 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 0200000

3200000 02.220082 2. 00000020 002 00200000

0 08.000. N. 0 0.0 0 00.0.0 0 0...

o 80.000. 0 0 0.0 0 0200 00> 0 02

o 80.000. 00 v o. . 000 0 0<

0 08500. 0 0 0.... 0 0.00 0 02

. 08.000. 00 0 0.0 0 0.00 N 0<

0 80.0.00. 0 0 0.0 0 000 . 02
000020 000000 00.0 00020000. 0000020 00020002 0000020 000000
.200 a. 200 .0. 200 020 2009.0 .200 0. .200 .0. 0008.2

00.00 8.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 0200000

0200000 02.220002 2. 00000020 00200000

0 0.820 0. m 0.0 . 020.0 0 00

o 0.850 0 o . o 0:00 0 0..

N 0.80.0 0 N 0 0 550 00> v 00

0 8.0.083 0 m 0 0 5.00 0 0..

0 0900083 0.0 0 o o 000 0 0,0

0 090.0003 0.00 0 0 N 0.00 . 00
000020 000000 00.0 0000020 00020002 0000020 000000
.200 0. 200 .0. 00020002 200020 200 a. .200 s. 000002

00.00 8.00 .200 0000.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 200000

 

 

 

 

 

Say—COME MZH<ZMMHA< 7: Qm—Ax—Omzm .HOZ mPZmn—Dhm

.:0—1:39 <H<Q QZ< m>m>MDm HZm—Qam QEmdeOU

179

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000000.22 _ 00020 _ 020 0020000 00 00 20.50000 02. .000 %

UZ~ZM<mE mmmmo<mh 002505.015 mMMEU<MH QDOmm LO 020.53. HZMDDPm Hzmabhm
2.0300000 mah<zmmhq< 7: QSAOMZm mHZmQDHm
.
00.0005 wzobm m 000m< m 00000. m 00pm< m 0080. 0000 v :00 .0: 05 0 m0
m 00.9.. m 00.00. m 0080. m 00%». m 00.00. 0000 . 30> .02 m m%
m 00%.... m 000m< m 000m< m 00.00. m 0000.4. 0.00 v .000 .0: 05 0 wk
m 000w< m 0000).. m 0080. m 000w< m 00.00. 0000 v :00 .0: 05 m wk
. 000wm05
m 000m< N 0000005 008% m 0080. m 00hw< 0000 v .000 .00 05 N 2.
m 00.9.. m 000M». N 000w005 m 0080. m 0000.0. 0.0”. . 200> .02 _ m...
09005025. 0500.0 0.2.”. Dmm<mm~E m: ”.0 ZOE.<UDDm 0:): 05.0

02.20050 35:00.50 ”02.1.0590. mammuxfik Q3000 .00 07:02.”. HZmQDFm thQDFm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m3: wHMOmw

LS: H500

000000808 mqmflr <H<D QZ< m>m>MDm PZMDDHm QENAAEOU

ZOEMEEOU

ECOME m>F<ZMmHH< 7: QEAOMZN HOZ mEmQDHm

a):

mmDAU

E): mmDAU

Say—000000 m>~H<ZMmHH< E ijOM—Zm thmDDhm

BEEN—OLE—

 

180

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AOOEUw ZDkMOmmO >A¢<ADOMM
7: wEmdmOmm AOOIUw 020:2 kUmemM ‘50:me QMkaw: DMZMkw:
:0:—$0DMQ Qmmi ZO—w—UMQ mum—m QmQkak< wmm=0<mkk Z~Z~EQ< kZmQDkw
2<m0O~E m>_k<ZMmkA< 7: Qflqomzm wkZm—QDkw

N 8&35 m 02w< m 02w< m 08w< 02935 m 02m< m ovum/x 0 wk
N voluwmma m 02w< m 02w< m 08w< m 000w< m 02w< m 08w< w wk

_
N gamma 8&35 wcobw m 02w< m 02w< R:w< m 02m< m 02m< 0 wk

_
N 8&35 08»me wcobw m oEw< m 000w< m 08w< m 08m< m 02w< m wk

_
m 02m< m 000w< m 08w< 8&30 wcobw m oo&< N gamma N 3&35 N wk
_
N 8&020 N 8&85 m 08m< 0380 wcobw N 8&35 m 02w< m 08m< _ wk
ZDkMOnEO >4x<430mx
wEm‘EOyE AOOIUw 020.32 kummwmm AOOIUw QmkawE QmkawE
I04< \ 03mm 05:; ZOE—0mm mmmm QmQkak< wmw30<mk 25:23 kZmQDkw
2<m0O~E m>Hk<ZMmkA< 7: Qm‘jomzm kOZ wkzmobkw
m 02m< n oohw< m 02w< m 08m< m 02w< 23 ~02 N Hazkofiow o w<
v 80?. mcobw v 02w< mcobw v oouw< wcobw v 02m< mcobw w oohw< wcobw 0000 N Hanson—0w w w<
m ”2? m 02? m 80< m 80< m 9:3 in _ be, 82 v m<
m 023 m 8h? v 806 MES m new" m 02? 080 N “2358 m m<
u _ nomuma

N 8&35 8&35 wcobw w=0bw m 02w< N 8535 ..00m ~ b? 82 N w<
m ”a? m 8.? m 80< m 089‘ m 85‘ in V :8 a: 20 _ m<

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9000:000an mqm<k <k<Q QZ< w>m>MDw kZmDDkw QEEAEOU

181

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N 8035 N 80E0 N 80¢. N 80.0 N 806 N 80< N 80< _ 3
2200 20 00>20 202200 00200200 000523
30> 2200 0000 000m 000 E 000: Nam—0300‘ 0000000 0.25 0200000
256000 022200.02 5 00000020 N02003N
N com-W35 N 80< N 80? N 80< N 80< N 8m N 80< 0 N0
N 8035 N 8035 N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< N Na
N 8035 N 8035 N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< .0 Ne
N 8035 N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< N 80< N N0
_
N 30085 N 0200me m cem< 020000 macaw m 0201‘ m 020.0 m 020< N wk
N 8035 N 8035 N 80< N 80< N 80< N 8035 N 80< _ N0.
2200 5 002 202200 002000200 00% 20 000350: 020
230> 2200 0000 0.00 0020 N00000: 500000 0200000
2400000 0232000? 20 00000020 002 32000.0
N 8035 N 80.0 N 80< N < 85 0o .82 N 800‘ N 806 e 3
0 an macaw m 02w< v Sam—200w Near v mums wwwaobw v BEN chobw n w<
_
NN 8035 N 8035 N 8035 803:. 08% 25 .0 52 N 80< N 80< v 3
N §< N 80< N 80< N 80< 80. N 8.? N 80gV N «4
_
N 3.035 N 30035 N 8585 000080 waobw 02 N 80085 N 02085 N w<
N 8.035 N oMMaNE m 30M< m 3% 200 no 002 m 00.06 m 0% _ w<

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9000500000 mim<k <k<Q D72 wand/gm HZm—DDkw Dam—45200

182

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

52: 0o 8:50 N 030‘ N 5,0 N 80< N 0035 N 50¢ N M.035 N 3
300 < Nk8|0< N 8035 N 5,0 N 00300 N 810< N 8035 _ N<
545w 5>kw5
wQZmE 559,50me 0Z~>AOw m0... meZ<ZE >mkq<mm 5m k.ZOU
:53 0250 S? H qmomm Nam—NM Z<0 m0<Z<2 Z<0 m5 Ok Emma HZWASkw
24500?”— m>~k<ZMMkA< Z5 QBAOMZM wkZmQDkw
N050050w m 000m< m 000w< m 000m< m 000w< m 000m< m 000w< 0 wk
N0> m 0000< m 000.0 m 0000< N 00085 m 80.1 N 30me5 m wk
3% m 000w< m 000w< m 000w< N 00035 m 0000< N 000085 v wk
E05 .00 080w m 000m< m 000w< m 000W< m 0003 m 000w< m 000000 m wk
E05 00 0E0w N 000905 N 00035 N 00535 m 0000< m 000w< N 00%35 N wk
_
02 m 000w< m 000w< m 000w< 000M005 mcobw v 000m< wcobw m 30.0 5 wk
wxfi—Ew m3>kwmn=4
wQZm—Em 555200me 0Z_>1_Ow mON wm02<ZE 51—575: 5m k.ZOU
It? 0Z<I E< _ qmomm Amma— Z<0 m0<z<2 Z<0 m>5 0k m~=wm5 kzmobkw

 

 

 

00:00:09 mam<k <k<5 57?N w>m>m3w rHim—53km kamEN—EOU

Say—8&0 m5k<zmmk4< 7: DmAAOMZm kOZ wkZm—Qbkw

183

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>30
N0> 0Eow No> oz 33 : 0:00: 02 00:05:. :65 0 wk
N0> N\_ Son< 00> oz 305 C50 _ 0 Z u0mE=8£Q w wk
a0
02 N0> N0> £000 82 0.03 : szozk _ N0> v wk
E05 5:3 02 N20. 08
cm 30% _ oz N0> 9 00:83 .02 .3002 0E: Em oz 02202 m wk
N008. .8
305. rcou _ 0Eow N0> oz 33 : Ewaock OZ 3% N wk
E05
oz 3% 8% 5:3 02:55 305. Can 02 c0mE=00N5 _ wk
wDZmEm ZO_kU<DDm 30> mUw k4< :Uw k4< 30>
>Z<2 m><: OZEZ—kZOU ka<DQ<MO mUZdeE no ZQZEO QZMkk< MDOUZM
30> Q5 wQZmEu wazmzfi wQZmSE wQZmfiE wQZmE wosz kZmQDkw
Z<MOO~E m>_k<Z~Ekq< 7: QEAOMZM kOZ wkZmQDkw
02 m 000m< m 000w< m 000w< m 000m< m 000w< 09%“me o w<
_ go _
02 m 02m< m 000w< macaw 8&85 mnohw v 000m< wcobw m 000w< m w<
oz N ”a? N 02? N 023 N 02? N 023 N 020:5 v 2
02 N y? v 80? 8% v we“? 080m N 8min v 8m< macaw N 02? N m<

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

€025.88 Bm<k <k<O QZ< w>m>mbw kZmQDkw QEEEOU

184

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

w: E AOOIUw 2— mm 7: 0m2M<m3
2093mm >M02m=2 >1—k2mMED k2m>m m><m wflzmam mk—B 02503.5
"3205 w: mZOQ 0:205 0k mu: $3.528“ m=>=k kZmQDkw
SEN—DOME mZk<zmmkA< 22 QEAOMZm k02 wk2m03kw
0020: 0005000 00002
000020 00:80 :8 30:00
00 > 0Eow 00 > 0E 29 .00> 0 003 x 20w 00> 05w 82 e w<
00000—0 00:080.
00000 0:03 0:05
00> S 0:2? 00> 003 z 08 Eek 005 0:00: monk 00> 00> w w<
#100 0.50:0
02 00> 00> 02 3:00.. Nosk oz 305. 0.:20 3 v w<
0:05 00:03 000030 0:080
00: _ 00:002. 0:0 030.00
8 000:» 3 oz 00 > cm 8 08:03 N 003 x 35 Sum 00 > 00 > m w<
8 map—03
3:0: N05 _8._8
.00 00:30: cm 9 ow 9 0E
305. 0.53 0Eow 00 > 8 Ho: 0E 20 k 08:03 mock 0.950 .00> 02 N w<
05mm
ow 9 0E 0:03 No 08— 0:03
02 00> 00> 0.550 00:30.,— 0005 0E Eek oz 00502 2 w<
wDZm—E 203ku<3nm 30> 30w k.._< 20w k4< 30>
>2<2 m><m 2523200 ka<3Q<MO mUZm—DE m0 29230 Dzmhk< ”—3002”,—
30> an wOZMPE wQZmEE wQZMEE wDZmE wQZME wQZmZE kzmQDkw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

€025.58 m4m<k <k<D DZ< w>m>MDw kZmQDkw kam‘HEOU

EGOML mZk<2MMkA< 2H Qmjomz‘m wkZmQDkw

185

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.:0 05 00 0:0 0:0 mm: 00 $3 mE502 $2 WE502 0300.: E 000 N :05 0:02 0 w<
000E008 000020 :003000 00000—0 05 3%
.w .= .00—$0M 00:05 >2 0x005 00mg: :0 0:0 00:2 3 :05 00:00 00 .0000: E05 E03 E _ :05 0003 n w<
000E002 _00E0w
.:0 05 00 0:0 00:05 >2 mE502 0&5 20E =0500_00m 00500.3 E _ :05 0003 v w<
00:00 00
00 82% 00000—0 0_:E_0 003 3:05
0:05 0000 N2 :8 003 z .305 0000 0.:—05 _ 4:02000 :00 0M0:0E 0: 30: 0:000 000E E N; m w<
SE
@082 05502 0:232 0:282 0:282 :02: 0:282 0N 55 33 N 0<
0:0 02 E502 wE502 30:0— 3:00 wE502 ::0 m5: E _ :05 0003 2 w<
w: 23 AOOmUw 23 w: 22 QmZm<m2
ZOmeE >Ak2mmmn—EQ k2m>m m><m wQZmE FEB 02~>Q3kw
$205 >m02m2 w: mZOQ "3205 0k 533 wm~b>3k0< ”'32:. k2m03kw
2.095003 m>~k<ZMMkA< 7: GSAOKZm wk2mn5kw
w: 2— ZOwMME ><3>2< 0003 0E
0:290 20sz 0: 2: 0: 002.000 022020 _ 05:82 0030 .:5 05.0 N :05 052 0 00
0050mm
0:0 02 E502 wE502 mE502 wE502 .00_>0E 00 0:03 E 2 :05 0004 w wk
=050x000
300002 wE502 wE502 E502 E502 00x03 .:.0 NE: E _ :05 0001— 0 wk
0:0»:0 .0200 00000.0 NE 00 05:5
00 0_E5 0.500 E 00:00 0:00 E 00:00 0:00 mE502 :00 _ mE502 So NEE E N; m wk
00:00 005 E 0 E5 250 00E0w E:
020000 < 02000 cm 00 E03 mE50 Z 000E008 N 003 2:00 _ 000005 00E> 0005 on :05 0003 N wk
wE5E0 00000; 00503 903350 mo
25 oz 2.283 0:05 0:00 502 082 .850 00030 a _ 55 003 _ 00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

08 0:50 0.50

9025.59 mag k <k<Q QZ< w>m>MDw kZm—Qbkw awkmqm—ZOU

186

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0000a
0203 03003 NE 000 003
000 :03 003 .3 wE502 30: 20002 0 E0000 003 3 003000000 .w .2 00 > <2 0 wk
9:230 .02 3.500 008.5
0 00» 3.0303003 .30 03:35 3.:00 533 00 00 03:03 3053 0.000 3 00.30000 000.3» Em 02 <2 n wk
0000030 00330300
mE5E0 E 00:00
000003 00.3 300.30w 030000 E 300 30 03:35 3.:00 030 0.3 Ewaoak 003000000 .w .33 00> <2 0 wk
0000030
.w .33 :0 NE 30 0:0
300: 0 0.:003 03 wE502 mEow .3380 0:02 0000 0.:—0330 3 003000000 .w .2 02 <2 0. wk
0000320300000
3000 003305 03:00 00:00:00
0003 Eow E 2500 00:03.03 00300.3» .32 30 0000 .w .33 00> 300.. 003 03.3 N wk
030303
3000 :03 003 03 030303 3:0E 00 k 00:03.33 32 000.0% 300m 003000500 .w .2 02 <2 3 wk
330w k.3< AOOEUw k13< >702 030
202330 w: 30m3w< w: kUme< 200mm 200mm 3003.30w 209333
wkzmm<3 m3>3k<0m32 m3>3k3w03 >333 033? 02mkk< k<333 k2m303kw
233300333 m3>3k<ZMMkA< 23 QijMZm k02 wk2m03kw
_ 00000000 300:0w _ 0:300 _ _ _ _ 00E50Eo0 _ 0E _

 

80:05:0an mam/0? <k<n3 QZ< w>m>~33w kZmQDkw Gem—403200

187

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30 00000 0:00
03 03:35 .02 3 wk
2m3k<
0k 203w3um0
A3000 k2mn33kw
203300303 m>3k<233m3k13< 23 05130332.,"3 k02 wkzmabkw
wE5N:0 N0 03
wE3=3 E02 N020 0.:030 0003033 000.3000 k 00003 N2 003005.00 .w .2 02 0E 5000 00000 0 w<
.00 0000030
30w 3.:03003 0E NE 30 303 000330003 000
3 Emacs k 00000» N2 00030; 0000000 k 0 0000 3.:030 3 003005300 .w .2 00 > 0E 03 000:0 k m w<
[$000000 000E 0000030 3003300 0%
0.530 000 00 E000 mE0m3 NE E30000 003 3 h30 .0_ 0 000032 00300500 .w .2 02 0. 0E0 0300 k 0 w<
Jug”; 00 E0003
03 0E 08:03 0050030 000E 00033000: 00:00 3003300 E N000
E0E N2 N:0E 302 0000030 0033005 00 0.3 Emacs k 0EE 00 0:003 00 > 03 0E 000E>:0U m w<
00303 000 00.3 NEED 00303 05
003 33 00033 003 0000030 003: 3.:030 .wE502 00350 N2 003000000 .w .2 02 <2 N w<
.0 .0 03283
300: 0 0.:003 005 0000030 00330E0
: Emacs k mEom 03.3000 0; k 00000.0 00:0Ew Ewsoc k 003005.00 .w .2 02 <2 3 w<
330w k3< 3003.30w >702
2032330 w3.3 kommw< w33 kommw< 2200mm k3< 2200303 1300:0w Q30 20w~3m33
wk2m333<n3 m3>3k<0m2 m3>3k3wON3 >333 03.33 Qkak< k<33>> k2m3n33kw

 

2.0338253 m3>3k<2~3m3ku3< 23 03.305333 wkZMDDkw

3000000003 m3m<k <k<Q QZ< w>m3>MDw kZmDDkw 03303200

 

188

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

oz 0 m<
9% n m<
855
NE BEE .oz 0. m<
30.830.» 03.83
:66 _ =5 .8» m m<
30238
Egan 62 N m<
.m .3 .wou
“a 0030; 0:8
3 0%: .oz 3 m<
Aim—.2
o... 2203qu
0000 0.20925
2.28%. 02.3.032me? E 8.39.20 $20035
oz 0 my
8». n my
mUGUE
as 332. 62 v me
30:23 N.0> 0333
0.56 _ .3 a; n my
30238
2%: 62 N we

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8033:3503 mamflw <H<O QZ< m>m>~33m HZmQDPm 995313200

189

 

00 .m .m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

003=w00 05
9 0m 00 08
000003 03.3
.NE00w00a
.mem 05 000.30
2: =0 05505
30 0000000 00.0.0030 NE .000: 3053 .E00w0003
0:000 .03 00303 N=0E 0003 000030 0.00030 0033 0.0 8000
8 00: 00 .3. 0.0393330 NE 000 003 cm 00 0E 08 0300
08 0300 0003 0 08 0300 E03 0.0030 .030 3 00030000 .m .33 0000.3 803300003
00> N233. .073 00000w N2 N05 .00? 000 N2 .m .2 00003 00000 N
.0008me
000-00
-000 000:0
00w 03000 003000
.030: 0.58 3 0300 8 :0N 8 0000000000000
000 0.000030 003000000 .3: 0.03 0300 .030 3 003000000 003000000 603300003
.00.». oz 00330.00m N2 N05 50> .m .2 .m .2 3
3000303000
000w 0E00w00n3 3E00w0003 3.800w0003
0 0:00on .0m3 03¢. .0m3 .03< .033 .0340. 0E00w00q
.0m3 05 0.00000 3.0000w0003 05 00030 05 0.00000 .0m3
.03< 05 9 00303000 .0m3 03¢. 00 00303000 00 00303000 .03. 05 0E00woa 3.8003003
000:0 00: 05 05 00030 00 0:0N 0.30 0.00000 00 .0m3 .03< .0m3 .03<
00 00020 0000033003 00303000 0.30 000003.303 000003.303 300303000 05 000.30 05 E 330000 E0005
8 00303000 0000303 0000003303 0030000000 30000003 05 0008 000: =0N 00 00930.3
05 00>? 0=0N 05 0000003 00033 0:0N 0R3 000N 05 0033 030 3033 00N 030 303.3

 

 

3300235 35030 0o E02

190

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000 03003 NE 0300 EoE N2 003000000 003000000 3003300003
33 .oz 000 02,2: 83 0: .oz .0 .2 .0 .2 0
.000E
33300 03003
030030an 000330000 .030 800% 0330000
N00 0>0: 0033 005 NE 00w 0E00 0000
0.003003 .0000 000303 000 003000 00 w03£N00 00 0300 00 00
3 0300 N05 .30 E3 0 00 03003 NE 08003 3 000
.300000 000 3 0000000 03 0E 0303 00 M03233 EoE N2 .m .33 03 3303
05 00333 330 000.3 0E00 003000000 003 003000000 N00> w0300 3003300003
00 2 0000303 N2 00 000003 3 N2 EoE N2 .m .33 N2 0.0003 3 w
.OmO
0 w0300w
00333 003 .000N 3000.3
03 Ema—05 NE 30 000
.003000 .330 00 000 N2 000 00 330000
00 03003 .3300 000E 33033 3.0030 .0w 3 0E u\_ N 000000
33 0.000 000 0000030 003000000 E03 0.0030 .030 3 0000303 N300 000 .m 3003300003
00 > N05 .00? 0033005 003. .073 0300003 N2 N2 .33 03 E03 3 0
.0000030
00330Em
E0030 £33 .000w w0300 303300303
00 00 .m 003 0.3 000 00000w000m 000
.33 00300000 0000 E03 M0300w 003 0000002
05 2 0w 8 0000000 N2 3 00 M02 00 .m .2 NE 00003
0E 000003 .000 0003 .0000 0.0030 .030 3 0000000 wEow 003 3003300003
00> N003. .0 Z 00000m N2 0 73 N33000 N003. N2 0050.5 N2 m
.000:00W

 

 

30025800 0032035 05030 .6 €02

191

 

0000030

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.m .33 .0E 000 00330E0
003—$00 000 00 00000003 0003 00000
0003030 000 NE 03033 0E 030 ,3.
.0 0003000 003000000 <32 3330000
073 .02 000E 000 3 073 02 .m .2 000 0303 0
00300000003
.E00.. 000
003 00 30033000 000000
00 000003 .00 3303 000 000E 000
3 000 .m 000 003 5 .0E 000 0000030
.33 0030w00 .m .33 300000 000 00000003 00330E0
00 000 03 0003 0030w00 05 00000 .3330 N2 0003
00E00E00 0000303 00 00 wEow .00 00000 0000... 0300
000 00N NE 33< 3.300 00300 00 0 00000 003000000 373 3330000
00E00E0m .0300 < E03 0.0030 3 073 00000003 N2 N2 80 0303 w
.0E
00.3 000m
00 03003
.m .33 03 0E 0300 .m .2
m3 0 00 ow 00 00000000 .030 3 300300303 03 3303 N00> 3003300003
003. .02 E03 0.0030 3 oz 073 .m .2 00 0.0030 3 3.
0000030 0000
00330E0 0E00 00
.003000 000003
003 03 00000 .030 003 N33000
3 0300000 0 0w 0. 3 E0 00000 3
03 00w 000003 3 33 .EoE 0000050000

 

 

30800800 832035 05030 0.0 00.002

192

 

 

073

 

.oZ

 

000000
3030030 0

8 w030w E30
30 0Ew00 000
E03 0.0030
0030 0 3
.E0EM00N
00003

000 0003000
0000 030 003
53330300003000

00300 00 E30
000003 03

 

073

 

073

 

030 03

 

003000000
0333

 

<93

 

303300 003
0003000030

00003000

0000003
330000 E0

030V 03

 

 

30020800 00320900 05030 00 0.502

193

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allison, G., & Zelikow, P. (1962). Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban missile
crisis. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Amove, R., & Strout, T. (1978). Alternative schools and cultural pluralism: Promise
and reality. Educational Research Quarterly, 2(4), 74-95.

Amove, R., & Strout, T. (1980). Alternative schools for disruptive youth. Educational
Forum, 44, 452-471.

Ascher, C. (1987). The ninth grade: A precarious time for the potential dropout. Eric
Digest.

Bachman, J ., Green, S., & Wirtman, I. (1971). Dropping out: Problem or symptom. Ann
Arbor: Institute for Social Research.

Bamburg, J. (1994). Raising expectations to improve student learning. Oak Brook, IL:
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.

Barr, R. (1981). Alternatives for the eighties: A second decade of development. Phi
Delta Kappan, 62(8), 570-573.

Barr, R., & Parrett, W. (1995). Hope fulfilled for at-risk and violent youth. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.

Barr, R., & Parrett, W. (1997). How to create alternative, magnet, and charter schools.
Bloomington, Indiana: National Education Service.

Barr, R., & Parrett, W. (2001). Hope fulfilled for at-risk and violent youth: K—IZ
programs that work (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Barrington, B. (1989). Differentiating characteristics of high school graduates, dropouts
and non-graduates. Journal of Educational Research, 82, 309-319.

Barro, 8., & Kolstead, A. (1987). Who drops out of high school? Findings from high
school and beyond. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office.

Beck, L., & Mira, J. (1980). A portrait of a tragedy: Research findings on the dropout.
The High School Journal, 64, 65-72.

Biemat, M. and Dovidio, J. (2000). Stigma and stereotypes. In Heatherton, T. et. al.
(Eds.) The social psychology of stigma. New York: Guilford Press, pgs. 88-125.

Bonilla, C. (1993). School dropouts: The tragedy of America 's undereducated youth.

194

Stockton, CA: ICA Publishing.

Bowman, P., & Matthews, C. (1960). Motivations of youth for leaving school. Chicago:
University of Chicago.

Cervantes, L. ( 1965). The dropout: Causes and cures. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press.

Chamberlin, M. L. (1997). Making decisions for students with learning disabilities: The
special education teacher's role. Teaching and Changing, 4(3), 189-205.

Comer, J. P., Haynes, N. M., Joyner, E. T., & Ben-Avie, M. (1996). Rallying the whole
village: The Comer process for reforming education. New York: Teachers
College Press.

Crocker, J. and Quinn, D. (2000). Social stigma and the self: Meanings, situations, and
self-esteem. In Heatherton, T. et.al. (Eds.) The social psychology of stigma. New
York: Guilford Press, pgs 153-183.

Cuban, L. (1989). The at—risk label and the problem of urban school reform. Phi Delta
Kappan, 70(10), 780-784.

Cusick, P. (1973). Inside high school: The students' world. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.

Dale, E. (1965). Management: Theory and practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dom, S. (1966). Creating the dropout: An institutional and social history of school
failure. Westport: Prager Press.

Dorn, S. (1996). Creating the dropout: An institutional and social history of school
failure. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Dovidio, J ., Major, B., and Crocker, J. (2000). Stigma: Introduction and overview. In
Heatherton, T. et.al. (Eds.) The social psychology of stigma. New York:
Guilford Press.

Dugger, J ., & Dugger, C. (1998). An evaluation of a successful alternative high school.
The High School Journal, 81(4), 218-228.

Duke, D. (1998). A school of their own: A status check of Virginia 's alternative high
schools for at-risk students. A Policy Paper from the Thomas Jefferson Center
for Educational Design at the University of Virginia.

Duke, D. L. (1999). Considerations in the design of alternative schools. The Clearing
House, 73(2), 89-92.

195

Dynarski, M., & Gleason, P. (2002). How can we help? What have we learned from
recent dropout prevention evaluation. Journal of Education for Students Placed
At-Risk, 7(1), 125-143.

Ekstrom, R., Goertz, M., Pollack, J ., & Rock, D. (1986). Who drops out of high school
and why? Teacher College Record, 87, 367-373.

Fetterman, D. (1989). Ethnography step by step. Newbury, CA: Sage.

Fink, D. (2000). Good school/real school: The life cycle of an innovative school. New
York: Teachers College Record.

Fine, M. (1985). Dropping out of high school: An inside look. Social Policy, 16, 45-50.

Fine, M. (1986). Why urban adolescents drop into and out of public high school.
Teachers College Record, 87, 393-409.

Finn, C. (1987). The high school dropout puzzle. The Public Interest, 87, 3-22.

Foley, E., & Crull, P. (1984). Educating the at-risk students: More lessons from
alternative high schools. New York: Public Education Association.

Frazer, L., & Baenen, N. (1988). An alternative for high risk students: The school-
community guidance center evaluation [987-1988. Austin, TX: Office of
Research and Evaluation Austin Independent School District.

French, J. (1969). Characteristics of high school dropouts. National Association of
Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 53, 67-69.

Friedenberg, E. (1964). An ideology of school withdrawal. In D. Schreider (Ed.),
School Dropout (pp. 25-39). Washington, D. C.. National Association of
Secondary School Principals.

Friedenberg, E. (1970). Curriculum as educational process: The middle class against
itself. In N. V. Overly (Ed.), The unstudied curriculum: Its influences on
children. Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, ASCD,
Elementary Education Council.

Friedenberg, E. (1974). Staff burnout. Journal Social Issues, 30, 159-165.

Fuller, C., & Sabatino, D. (1996). Who attends alternative high schools? The High
School Journal, 79(4), 293-297.

Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London:

196

Falmer.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Geertz, C. (1988). Works and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.

Gibson, S. (1997). Alternative schools: Alternative to what? Religious Education, 70(2),
170-173.

Glass, R. (1995). Alternatives that help kids succeed. The Educational Digest, 60(5),
32—37.

Glasser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

Glickman, C. D. (1993). Renewing America 's schools: A guide for school based action.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Gold, M., & Mann, D. (1984). Expelled to a friendlier place: A study of ejfective
alternative schools. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Gordon, R. (1969). Interviewing: Strategy, techniques and tactics. Homewood, IL:
Dorsey Press.

Griffiths, D. (1958). Administration as decision making. In A. Halpin (Ed.),
Administrative theory in education (pp. 133). Danville, IL: Interstate Printers
and Publishers, Inc.

Grobe, T., Niles, J ., & Weisstein, E. (2001). Helping youth succeed: Building youth
development systems in communities. Boston: Center for Youth Development
and Education, Commonwealth Corp.

Gross, N., Giacquinta, J ., & Bernstein, M. (1971). Implementing organizational
innovations: A sociological analysis of planned educational change. New York:

Basic Books.

Guerin, G., & Denti, L. (1999). Alternative education for youth at-risk. The Clearing
House, 73(2), 76-78.

Hahn, A. (1987). Dropouts in America: Enough is known for action. Washington, D. C.:
Institute for Educational Leadership.

197

Hahn, A. (1987). Reaching out to America's dropouts. Phi Delta Kappan, 69, 258.

Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2004). Seven principles of sustainable leadership.
Educational Leadership, 61 (7). 8-13

Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The
sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change
and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly. 42 (1). 3-41.

Heatherton, T., Kleck, R., Hebl, M., and Hull, J. (2000). The social psychology of
stigma. New York: Guilford Press.

Hicks, J. (1969). All's calm in the crows nest. American Education, 5, 9-10.

Inger, S. S. (1997). The Bamstable High School P. M. Program: One approach to the
education of high at-risk high school students. Journal of Education for Students
Placed At-Risk, 2(1), 11-29.

Johnson, E., & Legg, C. (1984). Why young people leave school. National Association
of Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 32, 14-24.

Kellmayer, J. (1997). Educating chronically disruptive and disaffected high school
students. NASSP Bulletin, 79(567), 82-87.

Kerka, S. (2003). Alternatives for at-risk and out-of-school youth. ERIC Digest.

Kersher, K. M., & Connolly, J. A. (1991). At-risk students and school restructuring.
Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools.

Kleiner, B., Porch, R., & Farris, E. (2002). Public alternative schools and programs for
students at-risk of educational failure: 2000-01 Statistical Report. Washington,
D. C.: National Center for Educational Statistics.

Knutson, J. (1998). A second chance: Alternative high schools take different
approaches. Educational Horizons, 76(4), 199-202.

Kraemer, J ., & Ruzzi, B. (2001). Alternative education cannot be left behind. Education
Week, 21(6), 43.

Kronick, R., & Hargis, C. (1990). Dropouts: Who drops out and why and the
recommended action. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.

Lange, C. M. (1998). Characteristics of alternative schools and programs serving at-risk
students. High School Journal (Apr/May), 183.

Lange, C. M., & Sletten, S. J. (2002). Alternative education: A brief history and

198

synthesis. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special
Education.

LeCompte, M. (1985). HISD dropout study #1 : Issues in defining and enumerating
dropouts. Houston: Houston Independent School District, Department of
Planning, Research and Evaluation.

LeCompte, M., & Dworkin, A. (1991). Giving up on school: Student dropouts and
teacher burnout. Newbury Park: Corwin Press, Inc.

LeCompte, M., & Preissle, J. (1992). Toward an ethnology of student life in schools and
classrooms: Synthesizing the qualitative tradition. In M. M. LeCompte, W. and
Preissle, J. (Ed.), The handbook of qualitative research in education. San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.

Lehr, C., & Lange, C. (2000). Students’ at-risk attending high school and alternative
schools: Goals, barriers, and accommodations. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 6(2),
1 1-21.

Lehr, C., & Lange, C. (1997). At-risk students in second chance programs: Measuring
performance in desired out come domains. Journal of Education for Students
Placed At-Risk(4), 2.

Lehr, C. , & Lange, C. (2003). Alternative schools serving students with or without
disabilities: What are the current issues and challenges? Preventing School
Failure, 47(2), 59-65.

Lipsky, M. (1980). Street level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public
service. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Lumsden, L. (1997). Expectations for students. ERIC Digest, 116.

Maehr, M., & Midgley, C. (1196). Transforming school cultures. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.

Mann, D. (1986). Can we help the dropout: Thinking about the undoable. Teachers
College Record, 87, 307-323.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1995). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

Mayer, J. (1962). School dropouts: A perspective. In B. Chandler (Ed), Education in
urban society. New York: Dodd, Mead and Company.

McCall, H. (2003). When successful alternative students "disengage" from regular
school students. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 12(2), 113-118.

199

McCann, T., & Landi, H. (1986). Researchers cite program value. Changing Schools,
14(2), 2-5.

McDill, B., Natriello, G., & Pallas, A. (1985). Raising the standards and retaining
students: The influences of the reform recommendations on potential dropouts.
Review of Educational Research, 55, 415-433.

McDill, B., Natriello, G., & Pallas, A. (1985). A population at risk. In G. Natriello
(Ed.), School dropouts. New York: Teachers College Press.

McGee, J. (2001). Reflections of an alternative school administrator. Phi Delta Kappan
(April), 588-591.

McIntyre, T. (1993). Behaviorally disordered youth in correctional settings: Prevalence,
programming and teacher training. Behavioral Disorders, 18(3), 167-176.

Meier, D. (1995). The power of their ideas. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Miller, C., and Major, B., (2000) Coping with stigma and prejudice. In Heatherton, T.
et. al. (Eds.) The social psychology of stigma. New York: Guilford Press, pgs
243-272.

Miller, S., Saleem, B., & Bryce, H. (1964). School dropouts: A commentary and
annotated bibliography. Syracuse: Syracuse University Youth Development
Center.

Moore, S. (1990). Street-level policymaking: Characteristics of decisions and policy in
public welfare. The American review of public administration, v20 (20), I91-
209.

Moore, S. (1987) The theory of street-level bureaucracy: A positive critique.
Administration & society, v19 (74), 74-94.

Morley, R. (1991). Alternative education. Clemson, SC: National Dropout Prevention
Center.

Natriello, G., McDill, B., & Pallas, A. (1990). Schooling disadvantaged children:
Racing against catastrophe. New York: Teachers College Press.

Neuberg, S., Smith, D., & Asher, T. (2000). Why people stigmatize: Toward a
biocultural framework. In T. Heatherton & R. Kleck & M. Hebel & J. Hull
(Eds.), The social psychology of stigma (pp. 31-61). New York: Guilford Press.

Okey, P. A., & Cusick, P. (1995). Dropping out: Another side of the story. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 31(2), 244-267.

O'Neil, J. (1963). High school dropouts. Education, 84, 156-159.

200

 

Pashiardis, P. (1994, May 15-20). Problem and dilemma identification and formulation
as the most critical element of the decision making process: Behavioral biases
and characteristics. Paper presented at the 8th International Intervisitation
Program at O.I.S.E., University of Toronto.

Peck, B. (1997). Devolution in decision making: Some changes in national approaches.
Phi Delta Kappan, 78(7), 582-583.

Raffin, J. (1993). Winners and losers: Structures and strategies for increasing student
motivation to learn. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Raywid, M. (1994). Alternative schools: The state of the art. Educational Leadership,
52(1), 26-31.

Raywid, M. (2001). What to do with students who are not succeeding. Phi Delta
Kappan (82), 8.

Raywid, M. A. (1981). The first decade of public school alternatives. Phi Delta
Kappan, 62(8), 551-553.

Raywid, M. A. (1982). The current status of schools of choice in public secondary
education. Hampstead, NY: Project on Alternatives in Education Hofstra
University.

Raywid, M. A. (1987). Finding education's 'lost children': The status, cost and
prevention of dropout prone youth. School Leadership, 27, 27-31.

Robertson, A. (1997). If an adolescent begins to fail in school, what can parents and
teachers do? ERIC Digest.

Romanik, D., & Blazer, C. (1990). Reasons for dropping out of school and assessment

H M

of risk factors: A comparison of "dropouts , at-risk", and "regular students '.
Miami: Dade Public Schools.

Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.

Rydeen, J. (2003). Finding alternatives: At-risk students can succeed in well-thought
alternative learning centers. American School and University, 76(4), 43.

Sagor, R. (1999). Equity and excellence in public schools. The Clearing House, 73(2),
72-75.

201

Schrieber, D. (1967). Profile of a school dropout: A reader on America 's major
educational problem. New York: Random House.

Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review, 24,
783-791.

Sekayi, D. N. R. (2001). Intellectual indignation: Getting at the roots of student
resistance in alternative high school programs. Education, 122(2), 414-423.

Sherrow, V. (1996). Life Issues: Dropping Out. Tarrytown, MA: Marshall Cavendish.

Shibutani, T. (1955). Reference groups as perspectives. American Journal of Sociology,
60, 180-189.

Sicoli, A. (2000). Creating a school-within-a-school. Fastback 462.

Spencer, J. (1993). Making suitable referrals: Social workers' construction and use of
informal referral networks. SociologicalPerspectives, 36(3), 271-285.

Sprague, J ., Walker, H., Stieber, S., Simonsen, B., & Nishioka, V. (2001). Exploring the
relationship between school discipline referrals and delinquency. Psychology in
School, 38(2), 197-206.

Stake, R. (1994). Case studies: Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Stangor, C., and Crandall, C. (2000). Threat and social construction of stigma. In
Heatherton, T. et. al. (Eds.) The social psychology of stigma. Guilford Press, pp.
62-87.

Stein, M. K., Hubbard, L., & Mehan, B. (2004). Reform ideas that travel far a field: The
two cultures of reform in New York City’s #2 and San Diego. Journal of
Educational Change. 5 (2). 161-197.

Tidwell. (1988). Dropouts speak out: Qualitative data on early school departures.
Adolescence, 23, 939-954.

Topetzes, N., & Ivanoff, J. (1962). The dropout. Catholic School Journal, February,
35-36.

Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school
reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.

Tyack, D., & Tobin, W. (1994). The grammar of schooling: Why has it been so hard to
change? American Educational Research Journal. 31 (3). 453-480.

202

Upperrnan, J ., Curico, J ., Fortune, J ., & Underwood, K. (1996). Options for everyone.
American School Board Journal, 183(1), 31-35.

Waggoner, D. (1991). Undereducation in America: The demography of high school
dropouts. New York: Auburn House.

Waldie, K., & Spreen, O. (1993). The relationship between learning disabled and
persisting delinquency. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(6), 417-423.

Webber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. New York:
Oxford University Press.

Wehlage, G. (1989). Dropping out. In L. Weiss & E. Farrar & H. Petrie (Eds.),
Dropouts from school: Issues, dilemmas and solutions. New York: State
University of New York Press.

Wehlage, G., & Rutter, R. (1986). Dropping out: How much do schools contribute to
the problem. Teachers College Record, 87, 374-392.

Wehlage, G., Rutter, R., Smith, G., Lesko, N., & Fernandez, R. (1989). Reducing the
risk: Schools as communities of support. London: Falmer Press.

Wehlage, G., Rutter, R., & Tumbaugh, A. (1987). A program model for at-risk high
school students. Educational Leadership, 44, 70-73.

Weiss. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method qualitative interview
studies. New York: Free Press.

Whitfield, B. (1997). Decision making strategies in educational organizations. Journal
of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 68(4), 39-45.

Wint. (2003). Alternative schools serving students with and without disabilities: What
are the current issues and challenges. Preventing School Failure, 4 7(2), 59-65.

Wolcott, H. (1973). The man in the principal 's ofi‘ice: ethnography. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.

Young, T. (1990). Public alternative education: Opinions and choices for today 's
schools. New York: Teachers College Press.

203

AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT
NAME STEPHEN HEYWOOD MARSDEN

EDUCATION
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan
Doctor of Philosophy (2007)
Major: Education Administration K-12

Oakland University

Rochester, Michigan

Education Specialist (1994)
Major: Administrative Leadership

Oakland University

Rochester, Michigan

Masters in Special Education (1978)
Major: Learning Disabilities

Oakland University
Rochester, Michigan
Masters in Teaching Reading (1972)

Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan
Bachelor of Arts (1969)

Major: Social Science
EXPERIENCE

Assistant Principal 2002 - present
Waterford Kettering High School
Waterford Public Schools
Waterford, Michigan

Principal 2001 - 2002

Four Towns Discovery Alternative High School
Waterford Public Schools

Waterford, Michigan

Assistant Principal 1998 - 2001
Sashabaw Middle School
Clarkston Public Schools
Clarkston, Michigan

204

AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT (Continued)

Special Education Teacher 1974 - 1998
Waterford Kettering High School
Waterford Public Schools

Waterford, Michigan

U. S. Army - Brigade Operation Officer: Vietnam, 1970-1971

Awarded the Bronze Star and Army Commendation Medal
Military Instructor: Fort Knox, KY, 1969-1970

205

 

u111111111111111111Milli"
3 1293 02845 9554