)i s 7 'v 9'» u.4'"ul.-'- .rra :—‘a I“ This is to certify that the thesis entitled A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF ALTERNATIVE AND REGULAR HIGH SCHOOLS presented by Douglas C . Godwin has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for _£h.D_.___degree mwion 6: Higher Education 1 Date February ‘27, ]._9_76 0-7839 ' roux r .- I_!?'.RARY BINnERS A h" SPRINGIWU. “ICHIGII ‘2. A4... \ ' , “ll!“NlmzllljjlflmlLNMHJEl’IW‘UIflLHIi M K ' F 64 2:; £3 ’7 ABSTRACT A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF ALTERNATIVE AND REGULAR HIGH SCHOOLS BY Douglas C. Godwin Problem The purpose of the study was (1) to investigate selec- ted characteristics that appeared to be common in Alterna- tive High School programs, (2) to examine their uniqueness to Alternative High School programs as compared to Regular High School programs, and (3) to compare the opinions of Alternative High School administrators with the opinions of Regular High School Administrators regarding these charac- teristics. Methods and Procedures Thirty-two (32) characteristics of Alternative High School Education were synthesized from a larger list of characteristics developed from the literature and visita- tions made to eleven Alternative High School programs. Seventy-five (75) Alternative High School administrators were selected from the directory provided by the National Consortium for Options in Public Education. Seventy-five (75) Regular High School administrators were randomly Douglas C. Godwin selected from cities of 100,000+ population. Both groups were surveyed through a questionnaire containing the 32 characteristics. Each respondent was asked to identify for each characteristic; whether or not it existed in his/her program, and if he/she felt it were essential, desirable but not necessary, undesirable but acceptable, or absolutely not acceptable to good secondary education. The results of the questionnaire were compiled, the data evaluated, and the two groups compared. Conclusions Though three characteristics were found to be common in Alternative High School programs, the find was insig- nificant since the characteristics were not unique to Alternative High School Education as compared to Regular High School Education. Two characteristics possessed by Alternative High School Education were definite steps away from Regular High School Education. These were: students selecting teachers to guide their programs; and courses whose length is not controlled by the length of the school year. Alternative High School programs are more apt to house these practices. Where differences exist between the opinions of Alternative and Regular High School administrators regard- ing the characteristics studied, the Alternative High Douglas C. Godwin School administrators can be expected to respond on the whole more favorably to the characteristics. The value of the study is in the direction that it points for future study. The preliminary evidence uncovered by the study indicated that possible significant differences exist in the areas of performance contracting, emphasis on student credit over grades, no academic competition, the staff meeting at least monthly to evaluate student progress, and smoking being allowed in the school building. As the evidence mounts, the above characteristics might be expected to be found unique to Alternative High School programs. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF ALTERNATIVE AND REGULAR HIGH SCHOOLS BY Douglas C. Godwin A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1974 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people have played significant roles in assisting with the production of this dissertation; to them all, I sincerely say "thanks". A special thanks goes to Dr. Howard Hickey, a friend and chairman of the guidance committee. Also I express my thanks to Dr. George Meyers and Dr. James McKee for their insights, Dr. Clyde Campbell for the scope he provided, Dr. Ernest Melby for his inspiration, and Dr. James Matis for his help with the design. I also gratefully acknowledge the opportunities that Mr. Ken Green of the Flint, Michigan School District Administration provided which set the ground-work for the study. My special thanks also goes to the Mott Foundation for their trust in me without which none of this would have come to pass. ii DEDICATION This work is dedicated to my beautiful wife, Judy, who has been at my side through the whole production and to our children, Bob, Debbie, and Ken, who have patiently gone without a dad for these past few months. Tb them I'am and will be forever grateful. iii. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE. . . . . . . . . . . vi I 0 THE PROBLEM O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Significance of the Problem . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Limitations of the Study. . . . . . . . . . 12 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 II 0 REVIEW OF LITERATURE O O O C O I O O O O O O O 14 Introduction. . . . . . Philosophy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Historical Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . 21 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 III. METHODS AND PROCEDURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Sample. . . Instrument. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Procedures for Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 40 Alternate Hypothesis. . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 IV. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS . . . o o o o o o o o o o .5 0‘ Introduction. . . Analysis of Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 DiscuSSion. C O O O C O O O O O O O I O O O 69 smary C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 76 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued CHAPTER Page V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . 79 smary C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 80 conCluS ions 0 I. O C O O O O O O O O O O O O 84 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 APPENDICES A. SURVEY ANNOUNCEMENT--NASP, UNIVERSITY OF MAS SACHUSETTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 8 7 B. SURVEY ANNOUNCEMENT--NCOPE, INDIANA UNIVERSITY 89 C. REGIONAL BREAKDOWN BY STATE. . . . . . . . . . 91 D. ALTERNATIVE HIGH SCHOOL DATA SHEET . . . . . . 93 E. QUESTIONNAIRE WITH EXPLANATORY LETTERS . . . . 97 BIBLIOGRAPHY. O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O I O O O 104 TABLE III-1 o III-2 o III-3. IV-l. Iv-z O IV-3. IV-4 o Iv-S O IV-60 IV-7. IV-8. IV—9. IV—lO. LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE Page Regional Distribution of Sample and Respond- ents. O O O ,. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 35 Categories for the Classification of Charac- teristics O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O 39 Criteria for Classification of Characteris- tics into Categories. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4l Characteristics Classified as Common in ARS Programs. 0 O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O 48 Characteristics Classified as Existing in a Majority of AHS Programs. . . . . . . . . . . 49 Characteristics Classified as Existing in a Minority of AHS Programs. . . . . . . . . . . 50 Characteristics Classified as Unknown in Their Existence in AHS Programs . . . . . . . 52 Characteristics Classified as Common in RHS Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Characteristics Classified as Existing in a Majority of RHS Programs. . . . . . . . . . . 54 Characteristics Classified as Existing in a Minority of RHS Programs. . . . . . . . . . . 54 Characteristics Classified as Unknown_in Their Existence in RHS Programs . . . . . . . 55 Characteristics Which Fell Into Different Categories for AHS and RHS Programs . . . . . 57 Characteristics Which Showed Potential or Falling Into Different Categories for AHS and RHS Programs. O O O O C O O C I C O O C O O O 59 vi LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE--Continued TABLE Page IV-ll. Comparison of Characteristics in Each Group Where Confidence Intervals Did Not Overlap. . 60 IV-12. Comparison of Characteristics Which Fell Into Same Category for AHS and RHS Programs. . . . 62 IV-13. Number of Characteristics per Category for Both samples 0 O O C O I O O O O O O O O O O O 63 IV—l4. Characteristics in Which Significant Differ— ences Existed Between Opinions of AHS and RHS AdIninistrators O O C I O O O O C I O O O O O O 65 IV-lS. Items Where Significant Differences Existed At the .10 Level of Significance. . . . . . . 65 IV—16. Comparison of Groups for Directionality on Items Which Revealed Differences in Response B at the .05 Level of Significance. . . . . . 68 IV-l7. Total of the x2 Test at the .05 Level of Sig- nificance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 FIGURE 1. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 66 vii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction On November 1, 1972, the National Consortium for Op— tions in Public Education held a regional conference in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Mario Fantini, Dean of Education at State University in Paltz, New York, and a leading figure in the Alternative Education Movement, addressed that convention. In his remarks, he stated that Alernative School Education is "the only major movement in American 1 Vernon Smith states that: Education today." Because each alternative developed as a response to an individual community's educational concern rather than as a response by the mainstream of the profession to a concern for the national interest, the alternatives represent the first evolutionary thrust at the grass roots level.2 The new thrust is just over ten years old. The stimuli which put the proper forces into motion were identified by A. Harry Passow of Columbia University. 1Mario Fantini, quoted from a speech given at a region- al conference on Options in Public Education, Grand Rapids, Michigan, November 1, 1972. 2Vernon Smith, "Options in Public Education: The Quiet Revolution", Phi Delta Kappan, LIV, No. 7 (1973), p. 434. , In the early 1960's, as the civil rights movement and the war on poverty gathered momentum and as the post-Sputnik concern for skilled manpower highlighted the inadequate development of talent among minority groups, Congress was on the threshold of new social legislation and one could be optimistic, despite the apparent complexities of the problems. Since then, having spent billions of dollars on compensatory educa— tion, initiated thousands of projects, completed hundreds of studies of uneven significance and even more disparate quality, entered numerous judicial decisions and rulings, experienced dozens of riots and disorders, and generated whole new agencies and educa- tional institutions, the nation's urban schools con- tinue to operate in a vortex of segregation, aliena- tion, and declining achievement.3 Smith points out that in the sixties, the many attempts to reform public education were based on intervention stra- tegies. "Someone was attempting to do something to change the schools, that is, to make them better for someone else."“ The emphasis was the development of national curricula. As a consequence of the failures, free schools began cropping up, each focusing on special local needs. Most of these were independent of public education and presented an alternative to the traditional school. They were small in size, felt they were more humane in their approach, and more flexible in curriculum and methodology. John W. Donohue reports, though, that "the average life expectancy of a new 3A. Harry Passow, Opening Opportunities for Disadvan- taged_Learners (New York: Teachers College Press, 1972), p. 370. l’Smith, op. cit., p. 437. (or free) school is only 18 months."5 The problems of finance and legality played major roles in limiting the possible offerings of free school programs. Free schools did, however, begin to awaken the sleep- ing giant. Public school systems began examining their programs and creating alternatives sponsored under the direction of Boards of Education. Watson points out that "alternative programs within the public school systems have been stimulated by the rapid spurt in 'free' schools and by the poor survival rate of many of these small, hastily organized, poorly funded and overly ambitious private schools."6 Alternative Education, then, has expanded into two sectors, the private and public. Robinson claims that some see the movement as a legitimate offspring of the free schools of the sixties. "The ideas on which they were based--and still are--now infiltrate the public school system."7 5John W. Donohue, Alternative Schools: Pioneering Districts Create Options for Students (National School Public Relations Association, 1972), p. 13. 6Douglas Watson, Alternative Schools: Pioneering_Dis- tricts Create Options for Students (National School Public Relations Association, 1972), p. 2. 7Donald W. Robinson, "Alternative Schools: Do They Promise System Reform?" Phi Delta Kappan, LIV, No. 7 (1973), p. 443. Though young, alternative education programs in public schools are gaining rapidly in popularity. Robinson esti- mates that presently, 60 districts harbor alternative schools involving 15,000 students and 3,000 staff members.8 Watson's estimates are similar but project that about 200 alternative programs are in operation or on the planning boards.9 The evidence accumulated thus far indicates the focus for change in public education is transmuting from an intervention emphasis to a concentration on alternatives. As with any new movement, research in the field has tended to trail behind the exploration and experimentation of a variety of programs, methodologies, staffing patterns, and curricular strategies. Smith states that: No single program could ever meet the learning needs of all students. Different children learn in different ways at different stages of development.... Some teachers move easily into the open schools; some do not. A plurality of modes of education will provide opportunities for wider variations in teaching style and for more diversity among teachers. The ... preceding ... indicates part of the re- search potential of alternative public schools. Through investigations of the relationships among the learning behaviors of students, the instructional styles of teachers, and the characteristics of varied learning environments, we may find ways to develop more effective programs for all students.1° Smith's recommendations for research include examina- tion of learning behaviors of students, instructional 8Robinson, op. cit., p. 433. 9Watson, op. cit., p. 1. 1°Smith, op. cit., p. 436. styles of teachers, and learning environments. Are there, however, practices in these three aspects of schooling which are engaged in by enough Alternative High School Programs to be considered as "common characteristics" in Alternative High School Education? If so, are these characteristics unique to Alternative Education? Could any pniqueness pos— sibly be contributed to attitudes possessed by administra- tors of Alternative High School Programs? This dissertation will address these questions. The Proglem The purpose of this study is to investigate the follow- ing research questions: 1. Are there characteristics that can be considered as "common" in Alternative High School Education? 2. If so, are the characteristics unique to Alternative High School Education as compared to Regular High School Education? 3. Concerning these characteristics, do the opinions of administrators in Alternative High School Educa- tion differ from the opinions of administrators in Regular High School Education? A survey investigating these possibilities will be conducted, sampling principals from Alternative High Schools and Regular High Schools. Significance of the Problem An ailment of a bureaucratic society is the tendency to duplicate effort; the reinventing of the wheel. In an effort to avoid this phenomenon, the Flint School System in Flint, Michigan, laid careful plans in eXpanding its pilot Alternative High School Program. The Director of Secondary Education appointed his assistant and a Mott Intern11 to Visit eleven Alternative High Schools in the Mid-west to identify characteristics which appeared to be successful. In addition to those visitations, significant personnel in the Flint System were interviewed. The literature was selectively reviewed, the total data from the three sources was synthesized, and an operational proposal for the Flint School System was developed. It was observed by both members of the visiting team that though programs had differed, there were many similari- ties. There seemed to be much commonality in philosophy, size, operational practice, staff, and student body charac- teristics. The programs visited also had many similarities to those described in the literature. The initial evi- dence indicated that in an effort to break away from tradi- tion, most schools went in the same direction, adopting similar new practices. In this study, the common practices will be further synthesized and a questionnaire developed for the response of administrators in Alternative and Regular High School programs. The results will have several implications. 11A Mott Intern is a Masters or Doctoral Candidate who is sponsored by a fellowship from the Mott Foundation. The study will provide important data for communities plan- ning new Alternative Education Programs. It will begin the examination of the extent to which Alternative Secondary Education Programs are unique compared to traditional pro— grams. The study will also provide feedback for the Flint School System for further development of its programs. Definition of Terms Alternative High School Program (AHS) requires an explanation in addition to a definition. The term "alternative" (offering or expressing a choice) can refer to options that are "microcosmic"12 by nature (choosing a book on which to report) to those that are "macrocosmic"13 (which college to attend). During the Movement's neonate stage, different terms are being used to label the same things. The term OPTION is frequently interchanged with ALTERNATIVE which at times is replaced by the terms EXPERIMENTAL and INNOVATION. It must be noted that the four terms are not new to education nor does each have the same meaning in all educational circles. What seems to be unique is that in the Movement, each term is often used to label as well as describe. 12"Schools Without Walls", Audiovisual Instruction (September, 1972), p. 7. 13"Schools Without Walls", ibid. ALTERNATIVE is most generally used by writers in this field when referring to special projects or schools designed to provide program alternatives to regular school programs. Watson best defines an alternative in writing the following: While many 'free schools' have been started out- side school systems in recent years, there is now also a grass-roots movement for alternatives within public education. Such alternative schools, as well as pri- vate 'free schools', offer students alternatives to typical, traditionally organized public schools. Alternative schools, by definition, come in many sizes and shapes and with varying objectives and phil- osophies. That parents or students have a choice in selecting an educational program is basic to all. Alternative schools recognize that different students may do better in different types of schools and, there- fore, stress variety rather than uniformity. They are organized in many different ways with various kinds of student bodies. But all involve a total educational program.1“ He goes on to describe the six forms that Alternative Secondary Programs assume: 1. "Schools without walls," where students work and study in museums, businesses, hospitals and other places in the community and learn that learning is not limited to a school building. Mini-schools or "schools within schools," which can subdivide hugh high schools of 3,000 or more stu- dents into small, personal units of, for example, 150 students and six teachers who may focus their studies around a special interest such as aviation, art or anthropology. Dropout centers, where school dropouts can get the basic education and vocational skills they missed in regular schools. With about 25% of the nation's students leaving school before graduation, most com— munities could use such a center. ll'Watson, op. cit., p. 3. 4. Schools for students with special problems, such as academically failing, disruptive or pregnant stu- dents who, without such special programs, would probably leave or be forced out of school. Open schools for able students frustrated by typical, traditionally organized schools. Individualized study and self-direction are stressed but, unlike "schools without walls," the program is centered in one building. Schools for racial and ethnic groups who feel vic- timized by traditional schools. While supported by their proponents as necessary for the educational and spiritual rehabilitation of their students, some of these schools have been attacked as discrimina- tory.15 Alternative High School Program will be defined in this text as any high school program considered by its school district or agency as being "alternative" to its existing programs and possessing the following two traits: l. A total program that requires almost all of the 2. student's school time.16 Students or parents choose to go to the alternative school.17 The term will be synonymous with Alternative Secondary Edu- cation (ASE). that Common characteristic will refer to any characteristic has a probability of existing in the population 75% or more of the time. 15Watson, ibid., p. 4. 16Watson, ibid., p. 5. 17Watson, ibid., p. 5. 10 Cluster is defined in the study as a group of schools within a geographic area no larger than a region and no smaller than a city. Traditional terms will refer to terms which have been used during the last ten years to describe characteristics of Traditional High School Education. Straddle will be used in describing the occurrence of an estimator of a given category falling within the upper and lower limits of a confidence interval of a character- istic. Humanism also requires an explanation in addition to a definition. Humanism takes on many forms, as described by GoodJB: a. Classical humanism--a medieval movement away from authoritative scholasticism and toward revived independent study. Literary humanism—-a movement which affirms a clas- sical type of liberal education. New humanism—-any contemporary theory which empha- sizes the human qualities of the individual over all aspects of social or group interaction. Rational humanismr-a position which focuses on the nature of man as an individual rather than as a .member of society. Scientific humanism--a movement in which man is per- ceived as a biosocial organism who through his intelligence is capable of creating a humane civili- zation. 18Carter V. Good, Dictionary of Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1973), p. 288. 11 The literature that refers to Alternative Education is peppered with the term humanism or its derivatives. The meaning that authors give the word is not always detectable. Few authors whose writings were reviewed defined the term or held with one of the definitions mentioned above. Rather, they portrayed a definition which encompassed elements of several definitions. For the purpose of this dissertation, an umbrella defi- nition will be used. Humanism here is defined as the expression of deep concern for learners as human beings and for the attainment of human goals, whatever techniques are employed. Assumptions l. The study is based on the assumption that finding detectable differences between Alternative High Schools and Regular High Schools is the first step in determining whether or not the differences make one better than the other. 2. Cities of 100,000 plus population are most apt to create and house alternative high school programs. 3. Terms that describe mostly traditional high school characteristics are understood by alternative high school administrators who can translate each term into its alternative educational equivalent. 4. The National Consortium for Options in Public Educa- tion possesses in its membership a representative 12 sampling of most alternative high school programs.19 5. Assuming a conservative position in the hunt for differences between AHS programs and RHS programs will, in the long run, result in a more accurate reflection of real differences. 6. The opinions of principals make a significant dif- ference in what happens to students in school sys- tems. Limitations of the Study A significant limitation in the study is the number of programs that could be visited from which characteristics can be identified. Programs investigated in the literature present limita- tions since most present overviews and not detailed data. Also biases are naturally written into descriptions (which can not be investigated further). A third limitation is the impossibility of identifying 19"The consortium is an ad hoc group of people and in- stitutions which seeks to encourage the development of options in public education in this decade. The consortium has ... members from over 30 states and Canada and Australia, representing over 100 individual alternative public schools plus school systems, teacher education institutions, state departments of education, individual students and teachers, community groups and individual community members, educa- tion-related organizations and other interested individuals and groups.... Most of the members of the consortium and many of those involved in the development and operation of alternative public schools were engaged in efforts to reform public edu- cation in the sixties." Vernon H. Smith, "Options in Public Education: The Quiet Revolution", Phi Delta Kappan, March 1973, p. 435. 13 the total Alternative High School population for sampling. New programs are being created at a very rapid rate while others are being discontinued. A fixed population does not exist. Finally, the dissertation is designed only to be a pilot study. New ground is being plowed in search of dif- ferences in the soil. Alternative High School Education claims to be different than Regular High School Education. If research is to substantiate the claim, the many charac— teristics of both must be evaluated for differences. This study will address only 32 characteristics. Overview This study is being conducted to identify evolving common characteristics in Alternative High School Programs, to detect differences between Regular and Alternative High School Programs, and to examine differences of opinions of Regular versus Alternative Secondary School Principals con- cerning these characteristics. Chapter II Review of Related Literature Chapter III Design of Study Chapter IV Analysis of the Results Chapter V Conclusions and Recommendations CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Introduction The literature was reviewed in an effort to establish a theoretical base for the study. As mentioned in Chapter One, few research studies have yet been conducted on al- ternative education. The evidence indicated that approxi- mately a dozen studies were in process at the completion of this dissertation. Since research is limited in the alternative education movement, a theoretical case could not be established. A foundation for the study was therefore constructed by briefly examining the philosophical, historical, and metho- dological components of alternative education in the public school system. This review of the literature will focus on very cur— rent thinking regarding Alternative Education models and ideas. The present movement has not generated a substantial corpus of scholarly writing in the form of books or extended manuscripts. This statement should not be seen as a diminu- ation of the work of such scholars as Paul Goodman, Daniel Bell, Eric Hoffer, Alvin Toffler, Edger Friedenberg, John Holt, or the earlier writings of John Dewey, Sidney Hook 14 15 and Christopher Jenks; one could validly name many others. Alternative Education as a name, if not a concept, is a relatively new one and this review has focused mainly on the periodical literature dealing with the name Alternative Education. Philosophy The philosophy found in public alternative schools was inherited from the stimulus which prompted the creation of options in public schools, the free school movement which began in 1965. Robinson identifies the salient ingredient in that philos0phy. The thing to remember about the present movement is its concern for an alternative humanistic climate, not just an optional curriculum content. It seeks to provide an opportunity for the expression of a more open life-style as a reputable option to the conven- tional program which tells the student what to learn and dubs him a failure if he doesn't learn it.1 Barr et al., point out that: Since humanizing rates high in alternatives, curricu- lums embrace non-cognitive areas in addition to aca- demics. Most attempt to foster positive values and attitudes such as self—confidence, responsibility, initiative, openness, enthusiasm and sharing.2 Humanistic education is founded in the thought of earlier philosophers and educators with A. S. Neill's 1Donald W. Robinson, "Legitimizing the Revolution", Phi Delta Kappan (February, 1972), p. 400. 2Robert D. Barr, Vernon H. Smith, and Daniel J. Burke, "All About Alternatives", Nation's Schools (November, 1972), p. 38. l6 Summerhill as the dominant model. Fremon, writing about the free school movement, states that: "A. S. Neill ... has always been the unquestioned center of power at England's Summerhill, the original, purest, and longest lived example of the free school."3 Fremon neglected to point out how- ever that Neill's Summerhill was small, non public, and a boarding school--hence a very different setting from Ameri- can public education. Ofiesh et al., point to the influ- ence of others in stating that "we recognize as being sig- nificant and valuable many of the concepts of Carl Rogers, A. S. Neill, John Holt, Charles Silberman and others which have fostered the development of these movements."“ The impact of the philosophy embraced by alternative education is found in its diversity from the philosophy of traditional education. Comparing the two philosophies, Trow states: On the one side are those representing education when it is described variously as informal, open, free, personalized, independent, child-centered, unstruc- tured, anarchic, neoprogressive, phenomenological or humanistic--the latter neither classical nor religious humanism, but rather expressing deep concern for learners as human beings and for the attainment of human goals, whatever techniques are employed. Their patron saints are Rousseau, Dewey, Freud, Montessori and the more recently sanctified Neill of Summerhill. 3Suzanne S. Fremon, "Why Free Schools Fail", Education Digest (December, 1972), p. 20. l'Gabriel D. Ofiesh and Mary Elizabeth McIlvane, "Educational Technology and the Free School Movement", Educational Technology (January, 1972), p. 68. 17 On the other side are those representing education when it is described as formal, systematic, doterminist, environmental, subject- or curriculum centered, struc— tured, positivistic, neoconservative, physicalistic, mechanistic with a deep concern for the efficiency of the process, the quality of the product and the main— tenance of the system. Their patron saints are Bagley (essentialism) and B. F. Skinner (behaviorism), also Dewey and Freud (different passages).5 [parentheses his] Apparently, Dewey and Freud are quoted by both sides when it's convenient. Evans adds greater insight into the philosophical battle. Humanists, philosophers, social psychologists, social engineers, theologians and educators--all are suddenly again confronted with the free will-determin- ism issue, an issue that had been progressively shunted aside in past years as irrelevant, a semantic artifact, circular or psuedo-intellectual after a fruitless con- glomeration of speculation for over 2000 years of philosophical and theological thought.... Gradually, an ideological conflict concerning this issue has once again in recent years begun to come to the forefront as a free will or self-deterministic ideology became articulated in the writings of the so- called third force existential psychologists such as Rollo May, Abraham Maslow, and Carl Rogers. This was countered by a biological determinism articulated in such notions as Arthur Jensen's genetically determinis- tic view of racial differences in intelligence and in the work of Konrad Lorenz and his notion of a biologi- cally determined agression. This re-emergence of a biological-genetic determinism was coupled with a bolder restatement of radical environmental determin- ism by B. F. Skinner. Skinner appeared to advocate a mechanistic behavior technology in opposition to the self-deterministic position of the existential writers who were espousing a strong humanistic ideology. This suddenly not only lifted the conflict of free will vs. determinism, humanism vs. mechanism, to an unparalleled position of prominence in contemporary intellectual life, but deeply affected our youth as well. 5Wm. Clark Trow, "Alternatives or Needs-—An Epilogue", Educational Technology (January, 1972), p. 77. 18 Not surprisingly, a microcosm of this battleground can be found in our educational system. The old battle lines of educational philosophy such as Bagley's es- sentialism (which suggested that the curriculum be sub- ject matter centered, and that the teachers know what is good for the student and control his environment accordinle). VS. the conceptions of individuals such as John Dewey, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Maria Montessori and Alexander Neill (which pled for freedom for the child to learn at his own pace, and for the teacher to be responsive to the student's needs) had been inte- grated into an American educational system which was not sufficiently restrictive for the extremely content- teacher centered advocates, but too restrictive for the extremely student centered advocates.6 It seems that the battle is an old one and apparently the philosophies have simply found a new battleground on which to spar. Though diversity exists, Trow has identified areas on which both the humanists and the behaviorists agree.7 1. Both are assured of the rightness of their beliefs and are highly critical of present procedures. Both are deeply concerned about the changes that have taken place in our culture and feel that the schools have not adequately adapted to these changes. 2. Few proponents take an extreme position: it is prac- tically impossible to find a thorough going funda- mentalist on either side. 3. Both favor technology in some of its aspects. The extent of Trow's search for extremism on both sides might well be questioned since others claim that fundamentalists exist in significant numbers. 6Richard I. Evans, "The Free School Movement: Freedom to Learn Badly? Some Social Psychological Observations", Educational Technology (January, 1972), p. 40. 7Trow, op. cit. 19 Diversity of opinion also exists within the alternative education movement. Though all agree that change in Ameri- can education is a must, the remedies differ greatly. On the one end of the continuum is Illich who feels that schools are not the route for education. In his book, Deschooling Society, he states: Universal education through schooling is not feasible. It would be no more feasible if it were attempted by means of alternative institutions built on the style of present schools. Neither new attitudes of teachers toward their pupils nor the proliferation of educa- tional hardware or software, nor finally the attempt to expand the pedagogue's responsibility until it engulfs his pupils' lifetimes will deliver universal education.8 On the other end sits Neil Postman who has been labeled the "Soft Revolutionary." In an interview he stated: ... my optimism is born out of necessity. I don't see the free school as a long term realistic solution to our problem. So I start with the premise that if things are going to get better in the school game, they have to get better in the public schools.9 Robinson claims that: Institutions exist to administer a relatively stable program, and to most people the notion of innovation suggests substituting a new, hopefully better, program for the present one. That is not what the present revolution is all about. The real complaint against the establishment today is that it appears unable or unwilling to attempt to administer continuing change. 8Ivan Illich, Deschooling Society (New York: Harper Rowe, 1971), p. 20. 9Anthony Prete, "The Soft Revolutionary", Media & Methods (September, 1972), p. 35. 20 Not a succession of systems, but unending change, so that no curriculum or pattern can ever be defined.10 In writing about the purpose of free schools, Hechinger is quoted by Nelson as claiming that: The purpose of these private ventures remains to improve, not circumvent public education.11 Hechinger states that he is "certain that an urban revival is still possible within the next decade, in which public education must play a key role ... I stress public education because I'm convinced that there is no substitute for it."12 Edwards summarizes the most popular opinion in stating that "National authorities agree that developing alterna- tives within the traditional school program represents the best hope for the survival of the public school system."13 The two philosophies that Trow and Evans examine are well on their way to sharing the public school spotlight. With the infiltration of the philosophy of the free school movement into public education, strategies for change have switched from intervention to providing alternatives. Members of the movement place strong emphasis on the 10Donald W. Robinson, "Alternative Schools: Is the Old Order Really Changing?" Educational Leadership (March, 1971). P. 606. 11William C. Nelson, "The Storefront School: A Vehicle For Change", The Journal of Negro Education (Summer, 1971), p. 248. 12Ibid. 13Conan S. Edwards, "Developing Alternatives in Educa— tion", NASSP Bulletin (May, 1972), p. 132. 21 importance of options. Barr points out that the intent of the movement: ... is to offer students more of a choice about what they'll learn and how they'll go about it.... School- men who've tried alternatives say a key advantage they offer is a way to diversify public education and meet public demands-~both on the basis of a consumer choice.11+ Postman capsulizes the alternative school movement's point of view. In a country that prides itself on pluralism, how can we have a monolithic school system? This is the way of the Communists. Americans say that they value pluralism above all things. They say they wouldn't put up with a political system that offered one candi- date, an economic system that gave to one company a total monopoly, or even a supermarket that sold only one brand. So why do we have to put up with a school system that in many cases offers one basic approach to learning? This is really un-American.1 Historical Perspective The philosophical base for alternative education, as mentioned above, had its roots in earlier, European thought. Skinner, in looking somewhat critically at the philOSOphy reports: Men have been dreaming of the permissive or free school for at least two hundred years. The idea first ap- peared in close association with the idea of political freedom, and one man--Jean Jacques Rousseau--was large- ly responsible for both. He has been credited with inspiring not only the French Revolution, but, in his great work Emile, a revolution of perhaps comparable 1“Barr, op. cit., pp. 33-34. lsPrete, op. cit., p. 36. new. 22 magnitude in education. He was interested, quite justly, in abolishing the punitive methods of his time, and so were the disciples who were to follow him—- Pestalozzi, Froebel and his kindergarten, Montessori, John Dewey and (ad absurdum) Neill with his Summerhill. With Rousseau it was clearly a dream, for Emile was an imaginary student with, as we now know, imagi- nary learning processes. When Pestalozzi tried Rouseauistic principals on his own child, he came to grief. And, sooner or later, the dream is almost al- ways followed by a rude awakening.16 No matter what the value of the philosophy, it is not Nor is the concept of alternatives in education new. Robinson states: Advocacy of individualized education based on the in- terests of the learner is nearly as old as systematic schooling. From Rousseau to Dewey, the theory has been promulgated. The addition of alternatives has been a conspicuous thread throughout the history of American schools. The introduction of academies, vocational schools, continuation schools, elective courses, and work-study programs has over the years offered genuine educational alternatives for millions of students for whom the classic traditional schooling had little or no .meaning. In recent decades the progressive education movement and the short-lived life adjustment effort continued the tradition of adding options in order to extend the usefulness of the schools. More recently, such variations as advanced standing, independent study, and the nongraded school have further loosened the straitjacket of monolithic education. Nor is the plea for alternative education new; it is part of a democratic revolution that has been in progress for several centuries. But the revolution is warming up, spurred by the successes of some other revo- lutionaries and by the specter of catastrOphe if we fail to provide a humane education for all.17 Smith indicates: 16B. Skinner, "Contingency Management in the Class- room", Education 90 (1969), p. 93. l7Robinson, fLegitimizing the Revolution", on. cit. 23 There have always been alternatives to public education. Private schools have existed for those who could afford them. Vocational schools were developed in this century for those who wanted non-academic pro- grams. Until shortly after World War II, a student could drop out of school to take a job. But changes in society have recently made this option available to fewer and fewer. The need for programs for dropouts and potential dropouts was recognized in the 1950's and 1960's, and a few dropout centers and street academics were established.18 The idea of creating a humanistic school different from the traditional American School System also goes way back. Beauchamp writes about the Round Hill School, existing from 1823- 34. Created by George Bancroft and Joseph Cogswell, the school was established as an experiment to improve schools. Bancroft wrote: The idea ... of opening a high school, appears to open a fine field for being useful. I would gladly be instrumental in the good cause of improving our insti- tutions of education and it is our schools which cry out most loudly for reformation.19 Russel Nye states: It remains the most striking educational experiment of the decade in its attempt to combine elements borrowed from Fellenberg, Pestalozzi and the Gymnasium into an institution suited to American needs. It ... served as a powerful influence in the diffusion of new ideas on discipline, individual attention, and the stimula- tion of student interest.... Much of its mechanics is traceable directly to Prussian and Swiss schools....20 tion 18Vernon H. Smith, "Alternative Public Schools", Educa- Digest (December, 1973), p. 3. 19M. A. DeWolfe Howe, The Life and Letters of George Bancroft 1 (New York: Charles Sofibner's and Sons, 1908), p. 63. 20Russel B. Nye, George Bancroft (New York: Washington Square Press, 1964), p. 45. 24 Governance was based upon persuasion and reasoning, corporal punishment was frowned upon, and "the student com- Peted with no one but himself."21 Alternative education, therefore, is neither new in its precepts, its approach to education, or its methodologies. Its recent debut was, as mentioned in Chapter One, stimu- lated out of the backlash of the post-Sputnik educational drive combined with civil rights concerns over public educa- tion's failure with minorities. Discontent as the chief motivation, the movement began in the form of free schools which were created locally by small groups. Many were funded by tuition and some by foundation subsidies. Smith reported in 1971 that: As a result of several years of strife and bickering between the Boston School Committee and the Black Com- munity, the free school movement began in 1965 with the establishment of the New School for Children. Since that time, three more such schools have been estab— lished in Boston, two of them community based, and one of them an experimental school supported by state fund- ing. Similar schools can be found in other major cities of the country, and all of them seem to have been established as the result of parental dissatis- faction with the performance of the public schools and with what parents perceived as inequality of opportun- ity for their children. Free schools can also be found in Milwaukee; Washington, D.C.; Newark, New Jersey; San Francisco; Rochester, New York; Albany, New York; and many other places across the country. (It would be almost impos- sible to provide a comprehensive list of the various free schools that have been springing up throughout 21Edward R. Beauchamp, "An American GYMNASIUM: The Round Hill School, 1823-34", Educational Forum (January, 1973). pp. 165-166. 25 the country within the past several years.)22 One form of institution that cropped up in the movement was the street academy. Academies (also called storefront schools) usually found private funding. Smith reflects that: Several privately funded efforts exist for secon- dary students, and the most spectacular of these models can be found in New York City. Here, working largely with contributions from industry, a complex of street academies has been serving the public school dropouts for the past several years.23 Nelson concurs in stating: The best known is Harlem Prep and the system of street academies run by the New York Urban League, aimed at educating high school dropouts and getting many of them into a college or university. But similar efforts have been organized in cities throughout the country-- Boston, Philadelphia, Newark, Oakland, St. Louis, etc.-- often using different age groups.... Some street academies represent new schools for dropouts, but others serve as a supplement to the school experience by providing individualized tutoring or other special educational programs.2“ A difference exists, however, between free schools and street academies as pointed out by Fremon. She states: According to this conception, British Infant Schools, Montessori Schools, Open Corridor classrooms, multi-age classes, and the mini-schools beginning to burgeon within the public school systems are not free schools. Nor are the storefront academies in the inner cities. Like free schools, these are also responses to the rigidity, narrowness, and failure of our public schools, but they differ from free schools in one 22Joshua L. Smith, "Free Schools: Pandora's Box?" Educational Leadership (February, 1971), p. 465. 23Ibid., p. 466. 2"Nelsen, op. cit., pp. 248-249. 26 crucial respect. They all accept the idea of school as a place where children come to learn specific things-~reading, writing, math, science, social studies, languages, manual skills. A free school, on the other hand, embraces first and foremost the idea of the free individual, his relationship with other individuals, and his happiness. As for academic learning or voca- tional training, according to free school supporters, a student should and will acquire these on his own initiative as he needs them. His school must provide materials to learn with, but the timetable and develop- ment of his learning is up to him. It must never be imposed from without.25 Morse speaks of free schools in a broader sense. He points out that: Not only do many of the observations offered in the following pages, concerned mainly with alternative schools, have clear application to alternative media, but finally the two movements can be seen evolving in a special dynamic relationship, which is central to the Alternative Culture growing piece-by-piece about our ears. The free school is unique in the history of Ameri- can education. For one thing it is not simply one more large scale innovation sweeping the country (Progres- sive Education, tracking, flexible scheduling, etc.) but a complete turnabout from the whole trend of Big- ness. These are small do-it-yourself NON-institutions, brought into being by teachers and parents and some- times by students themselves out of antipathy for the public schools and the hope of creating for themselves a meaningful learning environment on a people scale.26 The free school movement was out to provide humanistic alternatives to the public school system. Bonnie Stretch wrote in 1970: The revolt today is against the institution itself, against the implicit assumption that learning must be 25Fremon, op. cit., p. 17. 26David Morse, "The Alternative", Media & Methods (May, 1971), p. 29. 27 imposed on children by adults, that learning is not something one does for oneself, but something desig- nated by a teacher. Schools operating on this assump- tion tend to hold children in a prolonged state of dependency, to keep them from discovering their own capacities for learning, and to encourage a sense of impotence and lack of worth.27 Public education by 1969 began to examine itself and to consider providing "alternative" strategies within its school systems. Smith reports that: But to the media, and therefore to the public, the alternative public school began with the Parkway Pro- gram in Philadelphia in 1969. Parkway was probably the first public school created to be an option for any student within its community. Berkeley's Commun— ity High started the same year; and Chicago's Public High School for Metropolitan Studies followed in 1970. Since 1970 the center for Options in Public Educa- tion at Indiana University has attempted to study and document the development of alternative public schools. The Center's staff now estimates that alternative pub- lic schools are being planned, developed, or operated in more than 1,000 U. S. communities today. The num- ber of alternative public schools in operation this year is between 600 and 1,200 with a total enrollment of more than 100,000 students.28 Cities across the country have embraced the movement. Seattle, Denver, New York, New Orleans, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Houston are a few of many metropolitan areas which have developed alternative programs. Whether or not the movement is here to stay is purely speculative. The entire movement may prove ephemeral. But even if few alternative schools survive, the movement will 27Bonnie Barrett Stretch, "The Rise of the Free School", Saturday Review (June 20, 1970), p. 76. 28Smith, op. cit., p. 3. 28 have made its contribution to reform, much as third parties in our political history have forced the estab- lished parties to adopt social reform.29 Methodology Six types of alternative secondary programs were identi- fied in Chapter One. These were: schools without walls; mini-schools or schools within schools; dropout centers; schools for students with special problems; open schools; and schools for racial or ethnic groups. Though each type broadly defines a set of criteria for methodology, adminis- tration, and student clientele, each takes on the flavor of the needs of the community it serves when it is translated into a school program. Barr labels alternative schools "home grown innovation, local solutions to local problems."3° Though the needs of communities differ, most follow the approach outlined by Robinson. ... the revolutionaries seem to agree, however, that the immediate task is to provide an alternative to the impersonal, regimented, imposed, lockstep learning. The necessary change is a change of climate rather than curriculum.... Most alternative programs offer smaller classes, individualized instruction, a humane approach and relatively conventional curriculum content. Within these broad approaches lies diversity in the specif- ics of methodologies. 29Donald V. Robinson, "'Alternative Schools': Chal- lenge to Traditional Education?" Phi Delta Kappan (March, 1970). P. 375. 3°Barr, op. cit., pp. 34-35. 31Robinson, "Legitimizing the Revolution", op. cit., p. 400. 29 Implications Beyond the general attributes mentioned in this chapter, not much is known about specific characteristics which may be common to Alternative Education. Additional information is essential. Mike Hickey summarizes the need best in pointing out: Public education has indeed been quilty at times of reducing education to blandness. On the other hand, alternative education has been too prone to accept the aroma of success as indicative of its goal attainment, rather than an honest scrutiny of what it is accomplish- ing. THE PRICE OF AFFILIATION WITH PUBLIC SCHOOL SYS- TEMS IS ACCOUNTABILITY, BUT THAT IS NOT TOO LARGE A PRICE TO PAY IF A PROGRAM IS INTELLECTUALLY HONEST AND EDUCATIONALLY SOUND.... One key to the future of alternative schools is their capacity to learn from each other's mistakes without repeating them. This approach denies the popu- lar ideology that each school is unique and must strug- gle on its own, but these ideas have not stood the test of experience. THE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL MOVEMENT NEEDS TO DEVELOP A "TRADITION" THAT WILL ALLOW A GREATER PER- CENTAGE OF SCHOOLS TO SURVIVE AND TO REACH THEIR AMBITIOUS GOALS. THIS TRADITION SHOULD SPELL OUT IN GREAT DETAIL THOSE APPROACHES TO DEVELOPING A HEALTHY LEARNING COMMUNITY THAT WORKS. IT SHOULD WARN PEOPLE AWAY FROM THE MISTAKES OF THE PAST.... Careful study of the successful practices in al- ternative schools, coupled with the development of a group of advisors who can help others learn from these successes, are both essential if the alternative school movement is to be more than another in the long series of educational fads.32 Hickey recommends honest scrutiny and careful study of practices in Alternative Education. This study will, in part, address that challenge. 32Mike Hickey, "Alternative Education and Public Schools: Is Peaceful Cohabitation Possible?" Changing Schools Newsletter, No. 003 , pp. 5 and 10. 30 Summary The literature was reviewed in an effort to establish a theoretical base for the study. Since little published research has been conducted in Alternative Education a theo- retical base could not be established. A foundation for the study was laid by examining briefly the philosophical, historical, and methodological facets of the Alternative Education Movement in public schools. Public alternative education has adopted the philosophy of its predecessor, the free school movement which began in 1965. The latter was patterned after A. S. Neill's Summer- hill with influences from Dewey, Montessori, Rousseau, and Freud. The neoprogressive and humanistic philosophy of the free school movement is in direct opposition to the essen- tialistic (Bagley) and behavioralistic (B. F. Skinner) phil- osophy found in traditional public education. Educational disciples of both camps agree, however, that present pro- cedures in schooling need changing. How to achieve change is the dominant disagreement. Some advocate eliminating schools while most authorities claim that change must come through providing humanistic alternatives within the public school system. Historically it was found that humanism or alternatives in public education are not new. The new form, however, came in 1965 as a backlash to the failure of education to meet local needs and the needs of minority groups. 31 The free school movement resulted with small private schools cropping up to meet local needs. Institutions in the move- ment took the form of free schools, open schools, and street academies (storefront schools). Each was designed to pro- vide an alternative to public education. The movement awakened the sleeping giant and public school districts began establishing alternative schools within their systems. These alternatives were patterned after their forerunners, the free schools. It was found that methodologies differ among public alternative programs but in general the immediate task seems to be to provide an option to impersonal, regimented, im- posed, lockstep learning. The concern is a change in climate rather than curriculum. Beyond this commonality, little is known about common elements in public alternative programs. This study will address that problem. CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURE The purpose of this study was: to investigate charac- teristics that appeared to be common to Alternative High School (AHS) Programs; to examine their uniqueness to AHS programs as compared to Regular High School (RHS) Programs; and to compare the opinions of AHS administrators with the opinions of RHS administrators regarding these characteris- tics. Thirty-two (32) characteristics were identified and sent in the form of a questionnaire to high school adminis- trators for their response. Sample The population from which the Sample was taken con- sisted of administrators in public high schools in the Continental United States (excluding Alaska). Administra- tors from private or parochial schools were excluded from the study. A sample of 150 was taken from the population with a group of 75 chosen from AHS programs and a second group of 75 chosen from RHS programs. Regular high school principals were selected from high schools in cities of 100,000 plus population. The 1970 census identified 158 cities of 100,000 population in the 32 33 continental United States.1 Using Patterson's American Edu- cation, 75 subjects were randomly selected from high schools in these cities.2 Alternative high school programs presented difficulty in sampling. As mentioned in Chapter One, a sampling of the complete population was impossible due to the newness of the movement, continuing rapid growth, and an incompleteness of available directories. Also, Robert Barr points out that little demographic or general information is available on Alternative public schools.3 Therefore, the National Con- sortium for Options in Public Education was contacted and responded with a directory (of its charter members) that had been updated as of June 1, 1973. The total membership to that date was 305 members. The AHS sample was chosen from the directory based on the evidence that each subject (1) was involved in an AHS program in a capacity which included decision—making in behalf of the school, (2) had direct involvement with students or parents during at least part of the working week. Eighty—four percent (84%) of lWilliam Lerner, Statistical Abstract of the United States (99th edition; Bureau of the Census, U. S. Dept. of Commerce, 1973), pp. 22-24. 2Norman F. Elliot, Patterson's American Education (Mount Prospect, Illinois: Directories Inc., 1973): 3Presently a survey is being conducted by NCOPE at Indiana University and NASP at the University of Massachu— setts to develop an updated directory and acquire demo- graphic information about Alternative public schools (see Appendices A and B). 34 respondents were directors or principals, ten percent (10%) were one step higher than principal in line administration, four percent (4%) were teachers in charge, and two percent (2%) were classified as other. From the descriptions in the addresses of each member it was determined that 224 quali- fied as the population from which the sample was taken. The sample of 75 subjects was 34% of the population of Alterna- tive high school administrators represented in the consor— tium. The consortium in turn is assumed in this study to be representative of most of the AHS population. Each group was then examined in reference to locality. The Continental United States was divided into nine re- gions.“ Appendix C shows the state breakdown per region. Table 111-1 on the following page shows the sample break- down. Clustering (schools found within the same region or city) in the AHS group seemed due to grouping of memberships in the consortium. Where cities such as New York and Berkeley endorsed a city-wide program, or where states were moving forward in Alternative schools, there was a large representative membership in the consortium. Such clusters were independent of any clustering found within the RHS sample. l'The state breakdown was based on regions outlined in Webster's New WOrld Dictionary, Second College Edition, The World Publishing Co., 1972. 35 TABLE III-l REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLE AND RESPONDENTS Total Sample Respondents Region AHS RHS AHS RHS New England 5 4 2 3 Middle Atlantic 20 8 8 6 Southern 5 16 l 7 East Central 1 4 l 2 North Central 25 18 15 4 Plains 2 6 2 4 South Western 7 l4 7 10 Western 5 3 3 2 North Western 5 2 l 1 Totals 75 75 39 39 Instrument The construction of the instrument, as mentioned in Chapter One, evolved from research conducted for a proposal for the Alternative High School in Flint, Michigan. A team of administrators visited eleven (11) alternative high schools to gather information which would be used in the construction of the proposal. The visitations of the team were conducted after careful planning. An observation instrument was first created to help focus on specific characteristics of programs. A copy of the instrument is found in Appendix D. Two hundred twelve (212) characteris- tics were identified from the eleven schools visited. The literature was reviewed in search of characteris- tics claimed to be successful in AHS programs. 36 Many characteristics that had been observed in visitations were also described in periodicals. Fifty-three (53) addi- tional characteristics were found through descriptions contained in the literature. For the purpose of the study, the characteristics were refined and reduced to 124 in number. Characteristics that provided similar descriptions or when merged stated a single philosophy were combined. The criteria for inclusion of items in the reduced list were: 1. Frequency of occurrence in programs previewed or observed. 2. The importance placed on each characteristic by the authors or administrators interviewed. The characteristics in the original report had been classi- fied into categories such as staffing, administrative prac- tices, policy, and methodology, but no characteristic was considered as representative of any single category. A sample questionnaire was constructed and distributed among a total of 26 principals, Mott Interms, administrators, and teachers for critique and review. Based on the feedback, the number of questions was reduced to 72 and the wording and phrasing revised. Traditional descriptive terms were used to describe Alternative high school characteristics in an attempt to avoid prejudicing opinions of RHS principals. The new questionnaire was administered to ten interns for a time measurement. The average time to answer the questionnaire was 55 minutes. A random sampling of 37 characteristics was then taken from the group of 72 with the intent of reducing the response time to between 20 to 25 minutes. In a telephone conversation with the president of the consortium, this investigator was advised that due to very busy schedules and a heavy bombardment of surveys, Alterna- tive school administrators were reluctant to take time to respond to questionnaires. Every effort was made to make it worth the respondents time and effort to reply. The questionnaire was constructed to include enough character- istics to reveal possible common characteristics in the AHS movement and still be short enough for a reasonable response time. Also, extensive demographic information was not re- quested to make responding more attractive. The question- naire was finalized and sent to the sample subjects. The distribution of the instrument for data collection purposes was achieved by mail in three stages. The ques- tionnaire was sent to each subject with a cover letter explaining its purpose. A follow-up letter and a self- addressed post card were sent to non-respondents. A copy of the questionnaire with the letters is found in Appendix E. The post card requested the recipient to check whether he/she had received a questionnaire, had completed and re- turned it; or if one had not been received, would he/she be willing to fill one out? Sixteen (16) post cards were re- turned and five additional questionnaires sent to those who 38 replied that they had not received one but were willing to respond. The returned questionnaires were then grouped into either the AHS category or RHS category respectively in preparation for the computation and analysis of the data. Thirty-nine (39) subjects responded in each group for a 52% response. Two questionnaires were returned with indications of discontinued addresses, and one was returned with no reply. Design The design and analysis of the study were organized with the consultation of Dr. James Matis, Associate Profes- sor of Statistics at Texas A&M University. The study was comparative and examined two dimensions: 1. The existence of 32 characteristics in AHS and RHS programs as perceived by administrators in each group. 2. The opinions of administrators in both groups re- garding the value of the characteristics. Each characteristic was stated in the questionnaire as a declarative sentence and required two responses. Response A--The subject marked whether or not the characteristic as stated existed in his/ her program. Response B--The subject marked his/her opinion as to the characteristic's worth to ood secon- dary education as he/she perceived good secondary education. Response A provided data for the examination of char- acteristics common to high school programs. Items that were not common were examined for their proportion of 39 existence in programs of each sample. Five categories in which items could be placed were created on a continuum. Table III-2 shows each category with its sample estimator. TABLE III-2 CATEGORIES FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF CHARACTERISTICS Category ' Sample Estimators Common P ; .75 Majority P > .50 Minority P < .50 Rare P g .25 Unknown P = .50 Legend: P = proportion of programs in which the item exists. Common items are also Majority items and Rare items are also Minority items. Parameters for the inclusion of items in each category will be discussed in the analysis section. Response B was a forced response on a four point scale. Each response was as follows: a. b. d. I (the respondent) feel this item is an essential element in good secondary education. I feel this item is desirable but not necessary to good secondary education. I feel this item is undesirable but acceptable in good secondary education. I feel this item is absolutely not acceptable in good secondary education. A forced response was used with the expectation that any 40 item left blank would be due to neutrality or undecidedness. The total responses to an item became the n for the item. The n for Response A differed from the n for Response B for most items. Hypotheses The research questions were refined to form hypotheses. Following are the null hypotheses that were tested: Null Hypothesis #1: The characteristics tested are not common in Alternative High School Programs. Null Hypothesis #2: The characteristics tested are not unique to Alternative High School Programs as com- pared to Regular High School Programs. Null Hypothesis #3: Opinions of Alternative High School administrators will not differ from opin- ions of Regular High School administrators regard- ing the characteristics tested. Alternate Hypothesis: Alternative High School adminis- trators will place higher value on the character- istics than will the Regular High School adminis- trators. Procedures for Analysis Hypothesis #1 HoA : P < .75 Legend: A = Response A P = proportion of AHS programs where item exists. Confidence intervals at the 95% confidence level were applied in Response A to the proportion of programs where the characteristics existed. The items were then categor— ized based on the result. Table III-3 on the following page 41 shows the parameters for inclusion of items in each cate- gory. TABLE III-3 CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFICATION OF CHARACTERISTICS INTO CATEGORIES Category Criteria Common 1.00 ; Cl ; .75 Majority UL > .75 > LL or .75 ; Cl ; .51 Minority .49 ; Cl ; .25 or UL > .25 > LL Rare .25 ; Cl ; .00 Unknown UL ; .50 ; LL Legend: UL LL C1 upper limit of the confidence interval lower limit of the confidence interval the confidence interval Where the upper and lower limits of the confidence interval of an item fell within the upper and lower limits of a given category, the item qualified for that category. Where the item's confidence interval straddled the lower limit of the "Common" category, the item was reduced to the "Majority" category. It should be noted that straddling the lower limit indicates that the probability of the item fall- ing into either the "Common" or the "Majority" category is unknown. What is known is that the item qualifies for at least a "Majority". Where the confidence interval straddled 42 the upper limit of the "Rare" category, the item was classi- fied in the "Minority" category. The item might be rare, but at best it is a minority. Where the confidence interval straddled the .50 sample estimator, the item was classified as "Unknown" since it is not known whether it is a majority or minority. What is known is that the item is not rare or common. Hypothesis #2 Ho : P = P A l 2 Legend: P1 = Proportion of AHS programs where item exists P2 = Proportion of RHS programs where item exists A = Response A The same procedure that was used with the AHS group was applied to Response A of the RHS group. An item com« parison was then made between P and P . Significant dif- l 2 ferences were considered to exist when: a. P and P fell into different categories for the s e item. b. The confidence intervals for P1 and P2 for the item did not overlap. Hypothesis #3 HOB ‘ Pil = Pi2 Legend: P. a proportion in 1th category of AHS 11 . . adm1nistrators P. proportion in 1th category of RHS 12 . . adm1n1strators B = Response B 43 The Chi Square test was applied to Response B of the data at the .05 level of confidence. Cells were collapsed when a cell contained less than two responses. Collapsing was necessary only for the last two cells involving the undesirable but acceptable and absolutely not acceptable responses. It should be noted that the questionnaire contained two types of items; those that described concrete practices and those that attempt to describe the more abstract atti— tudes or general characteristics. Since both concrete and abstract characteristics existed, it was imperative that each type be examined. The Chi Square test, however, re— quires dichotomous groups--that is, in response to a question the respondent can clearly assign his opinion, feelings, or beliefs to one group or another. There really is no con— tinuum--only A or B, yes or no. Since the existence of at— titudes or general characteristics often falls on a con- tinuum, it must not be assumed that the differences detected by the Chi Square statistic are absolutes for these items. Rather differences are to be considered to be indications only on those items which describe general or abstract characteristics. Alternate Hypothesis V13 V23 Legend: V1 = overall value placed on item by AHS group V2 = overall value placed on item by RHS group B = Response B 44 The alternate hypothesis was tested by examining Response B of the items for directionality. The items were also examined for interaction between Responses A and B. Summary A comparative study was conducted to: (1) test and compare the existence of common characteristics of high school education in Alternative High Schools (AHS) and Regular High Schools (RHS); (2) compare the opinions of AHS administrators to opinions of RHS administrators concerning these characteristics. A sample of 75 RHS principals was randomly selected from high schools in the 158 cities of 100,000 plus popula- tion. A sample of 75 AHS administrators was selected from a population of 224 AHS administrators who were members of the National Consortium for Options in Public Education. A questionnaire of 32 characteristics found in Alterna- tive High Schools was sent to subjects in both samples. Each characteristic required two responses. In Response A, the subject marked whether or not the characteristic existed in his/her program. Response B requested an opinion of the characteristic by the subject marking: 1. I feel this item is an essential element in good secondary education. 2. I feel this item is desirable but not necessary to good secondary education. 3. I feel this item is undesirable but acceptable in good secondary education. 45 4. I feel this item is absolutely not acceptable in good secondary educatiOn. Confidence intervals at the 95% confidence level were applied to Response A and both samples were evaluated for common characteristics. Characteristics that were not com- mon were placed into the categories of Majority, Minority, and Rare, depending on the proportions around which their confidence intervals fell. The two samples were then com- pared on each characteristic. Chi Square was applied to Response B of the character- istics to compare the opinions found in both groups. Finally, interaction between Responses A and B was then examined. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Introduction The study was designed to examine three hypotheses and one alternate hypothesis. Thirty-nine (39) administrators from Alternative High Schools and 39 administrators from Regular High Schools responded to a questionnaire containing 32 characteristics of high school education. Two responses were requested on each characteristic (item). In Response A, the administrator indicated whether or not the item existed in his/her program. In Response B, the administrator expressed his/her opinion regarding the value of the item to secondary education based on a four point scale: essential; desirable but not necessary; unde- sirable but acceptable; and absolutely not acceptable. Responses of "essential" were considered the highest in value and "not acceptable" were considered the lowest. Due to the low proportion of responses in the last category, the "undesirable" and "absolutely not acceptable" categories were collapsed into one category. In this chapter, the analysis of the data will be pre- sented followed by a discussion of its meaning plus a summary. 46 47 Analysis of Data An item analysis was conducted on the characteristics tested. Each characteristic was tested against the hypothe- ses to examine the results of the responses. Each null hypothesis will be presented along with the data which tests it. The items will be presented with every null hypothesis. Each item will be numbered in accordance with the item number in the questionnaire found in Appendix D. References to items will be by number. Null Hypothesis #1 : < . HoA P1 75 Legend: A = response A Pl= proportion of AHS programs where item exists Response A of the 32 items from the AHS group was tested using confidence intervals at the 95% level of con- fidence. The following three were found to be common in their existence. 4. The school staff functions as a team with the principal as team leader. 11. Reading skills are part of the instructional pro- gram. 18. Attitudes possessed by the teachers are, "I really care"; "I have time for you"; patience; understand- ing, acceptance for who you are; a real desire to help and meet the needs of students; interest in the students' personal lives; and ability to con- verse on the students' plane. Table IV-l on the following page shows the levels of propor- tion of these items. 48 TABLE IV-l CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS COMMON IN AHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval a Conclusion 4 .75 - .97 1.00 L p g .75 ll .91 - 1.00 1.00 ; p ; .75 18 .76 — .97 1.00 ; p ; .75 a = .05 level of significance p = proportion of AHS programs where item exists The confidence interval for each sample estimator was examined and each placed in the category for which it quali- fied. meaning 2. 12. 13. 14. 17. 22. 23. Fourteen (14) items were found to be a majority, that Pl > .50. These were: Each student is interviewed by the principal or a teacher after his enrollment into the school. Work experience (on-the-job training of students in part-time jobs pre-arranged by the school) is part of the program. The school arranged to offer almost any course needed or desired by students. More emphasis is placed on student credit earned rather than on grades achieved. The teachers have a functional understanding of a vast variety of materials, their conceptual and reading levels, and content value. No matter what is the nature of the program, the key to the success of that program is the personal and human characteristics possessed by the staff. The total staff interacts to meet the needs of any one or all of the students. Tabl 49 25. The school involves the community, sharing re- sources with it. The community is made an opera- tional part of the program where possible. 26. Students or their families have input into almost all phases of the program. 27. School curriculum and staff effort focus on skill development of students in the areas of social skills (living with others), skills in meeting one's interests, and skills in meeting basic needs. 28. Corporal punishment is not practiced in the school. 29. The program is also designed for highly motivated and politically minded students (students who want a say in curriculum and operational policy). 31. There are periodic rap sessions or clinics which al- low student discussion on matters that concern them. 32. The social environment of the school has equal con- sideration with the school's academic environment (by the staff). e IV-Z reveals the confidence intervals of each item. TABLE IV-2 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS EXISTING IN A MAJORITY OF AHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval s anclusion 2 .59 - .89 1.00 g p ; .51 12 .57 - .87 1.00 g p ; .51 13 .63 - .91 1.00 ; p g .51 14 .63 - .91 1.00 g p g .51 17 .60 - .87 1.00 g p ; .51 22 .65 - .92 1.00 ; p ; .51 23 .55 - .85 1.00 g p ; .51 25 .63 - .91 1.00 g p ; .51 26 .53 - .83 1.00 g p g .51 27 .73 - .96 1.00 ; p ; .51 28 .69 - .94 'l.00 ; p ; .51 29 .59 - .89 1.00 g p g .51 31 .73 - .96 1.00 ; p ; .51 32 .62 - .87 1.00 g p ; .51 ’0 II II .05 level of significance proportion of AHS programs where item exists 50 All items straddled the sample estimator of the "Common" category. Two items were found to be in a minority with P1 < .50. They were: 1. The student receives a battery of diagnostic tests within two to three weeks after his enrollment. The results help to determine his course of study. 10. Programmed materials make up a good portion of the academic materials in the school program. Both items straddled the upper limits of the "Rare" cate- gory. Table IV-3 shows the confidence intervals. TABLE IV-3 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS EXISTING IN A MINORITY OF AHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval m Conclusion 1 .13 - .43 .49 L p g .00 10 .13 - .48 .49 ; p ; .00 .05 level of significance proportion of AHS programs where item exists "0 II II It was found that no item for the AHS group could be classified as "Rare" with Pl ; .25. Thirteen (13) items, however, straddled the .50 level of confidence. Whether these can be expected to exist in a majority or minority of programs is unknown. Following are the items: 3. The student selects a teacher who will guide his program through his high school experience. 15. 16. 19. 20. 21. 24. 30. 51 "Performance Contracting" (contracting with the stu- dent concerning volume and content of his work for a course) is a major teaching strategy in the pro- gram. The same day the student completes a course, he re- ceives a grade and goes on to the next course in his course of study. Home study (taking a high school course while stay- ing home) is one part of the total program. If a student does not complete a course by the end of the school year, he will continue the course where he left off when he begins the next year. Graduation for a student takes place at the time he completes his required work. There is no academic competition between students. The student load for each teacher averages between 15 to 20 students. Books and other materials vary as much as three dif- ferent reading levels for any given course. The teachers have extensive understanding of how skills and concepts are gained through the many content areas (Industrial Arts, sewing, botany, etc.) of the curriculum. At least three staff members meet a minimum of once every four weeks to evaluate each students' progress. The school teachers are generalists. Smoking is allowed in some part of the school building. Table IV-4 indicates the confidence levels of each item. Items 6 and 7 straddled the .25 estimator as well as the .50 estimator. The probability exists that the items could be rare, minority, or majority. The test indicates that they are not common. 52 TABLE IV-4 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS UNKNOWN IN THEIR EXISTENCE IN AHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval m Conclusion 3 .41 - .74 UNK ** 5 .36 — .69 UNK ** 6 .17 — .52 UNK * 7 .22 — .56 UNK * 8 .34 - .74 UNK ** 9 .44 - .75 UNK ** 15 .33 - .59 UNK ** 16 .27 — .60 UNK ** 19 .49 — .81 UNK *** 20 .47 - .88 UNK *** 21 .27 — .63 UNK ** 24 .37 — .74 UNK ** 30 .30 - .66 UNK ** a = .05 level of significance p = proportion of AHS programs where item exists UNK *. = classification of item is not known but the item is not rare UNK ** = classification of item is not known but the item is not rare or common UNK *** = classification of item is not known but the item is not common Items 19 and 20 straddled the .75 and .50 estimators, meaning they could be common, a majority, or a minority. The statistical evidence shows that the items are not rare. In preparation for testing Null Hypothesis #2, Response A of the 32 items for the RHS group was tested using confi- dence intervals at the 95% level of confidence. Each item was tested against the sample estimators for each category and then placed in the proper category. 53 Items 4 (staff functions as a team), 11 (reading skills in the program), and 22 (human and personal charac- teristics of staff determines the success of the program) were found to be common in the RHS group (P2 ; .75). Table IV-S shows the confidence intervals for these items. TABLE IV-5 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS COMMON IN RHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval a Conclusion 4 .89 - 1.00 .75 g p g 1.00 11 .83 - .99 .75 ; p ; 1.00 22 .83 - .98 .75 ; p ; 1.00 . .05 level of significance proportion of RHS programs where item exists 8 ll ll Ten items proved to be in a majority (P2 > .50). They were items 12, 13, 17, 18, 20, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 31. Table IV-6 on the following page reveals the confidence intervals. All items straddled the .75 estimator. Table IV-7 on the following page shows the items that were found to be in a minority with P2 < .50. The nine items straddled the .25 estimator. There were no items that were found to be rare in the RHS group. Ten items, however, had confidence intervals that straddled the .50 level of existence. Table IV-8 on page 55 indicates the items with their confidence intervals. Whether they are a majority or minority is not known. 54 TABLE IV-6 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS EXISTING IN A MAJORITY OF RHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval s Conclusion 12 .72 - .96 1.00 ; p ; .51 13 .50 - .83 1.00 g p ; .51 17 .53 - .85 1.00 ; p g .51 18 .73 - .97 1.00 ; p ; .51 20 .50 - .82 1.00 ;:p ; .51 25 .68 - .94 1.00 ; p ; .51 26 .51 - .83 1.00 ; p ; .51 27 .66 - .93 1.00 ; p g .51 28 .57 - .86 1.00 g p ; .51 31 .73 - .96 1.00 ; p g .51 a = .05 level of significance p = proportion of RHS programs where item exists TABLE IV-7 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS EXISTING IN A MINORITY OF RHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval s Conclusion 1 .12 - .42 .49 ; p ; .00 3 .05 - .30 .49 ; p g .00 5 .14 - .45 .49 g p ; .00 8 .04 - .29 .49 ; p ; .00 10 .09 - .37 .49 g p ; .00 15 .10 - .39 .49 g p ; .00 16 .03 - .26 .49 ; p ; .00 21 .06 - .33 .49 ; p ; .00 30 .11 - .39 .49 ; p ; .00 a = .05 level of significance p = proportion of RHS programs where item exists 55 TABLE IV-8 CHARACTERISTICS CLASSIFIED AS UNKNOWN IN THEIR EXISTENCE IN RHS PROGRAMS Item # Confidence Interval a Conclusion 2 .43 - .72 UNK ** 6 .18 - .52 UNK *** 7 .43 - .72 UNK ** 9 .38 - .72 UNK ** 14 .32 - .67 UNK ** 19 .33 - .67 UNK ** 23 .45 - .78 UNK * 24 .17 - .53 UNK *** 29 .33 - .73 UNK ** 32 .47 - .79 UNK * UNK * UNK ** UNK *** Items 6 classification is not rare classification is not rare or classification is not common and 24 straddled .05 level of significance proportion of RHS programs where item exists of item is not known but the item of item is not known but the item common of item is not known but the item the .50 and .25 estimators while items 23 and 32 straddled the .50 and .75 estimators. In the former case, there is a possibility that the items are rare, minority, or majority in existence; and in the latter case, the items could be common, majority, or minority. Items 6 and 24 are not common while items 23 and 32 are not rare. 56 Null Hypothesis #2 HOA : P1 = P2 Legend: A = Response A P1 = proportion of AHS programs where item exists P2 = proportion of RHS programs where item exists Null Hypothesis #2 was tested by comparing Response A of the AHS group with that of the RHS group for each item. The null was rejected if Pl fell into a separate category from P2 or if the confidence interval of P1 did not overlap the confidence interval of P2. Two items were found to possess categorical differences between P1 and P2. They were: 18. The attitudes possessed by the teachers are, "I really care"; "I have time for you"; patience; understanding; acceptance for who you are; a real desire to help and meet the needs of students; interest in students' personal lives; and ability to converse on the students' plane. 22. No matter what is the nature of the program, the key to the success of that program is the personal and human characteristics possessed by the staff. Table IV-9 on the following page shows the comparison of the two items. Thirteen items were found to have a potential of fall- ing into different categories. These were: 2. Each student is interviewed by the principal or a teacher after his enrollment into the school. 3. The student selects a teacher who will guide his program through his high school experience. 57 TABLE IV-9 CHARACTERISTICS WHICH FELL INTO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES FOR AHS AND RHS PROGRAMS Item # l 2 Ho CAT C1 a CAT C1 “ l8 COM .76 - .97 MAJ .73 - .97 REJECT 22 .MAJ .65 - .92 COM .83 - .98 REJECT P1 = proportion of AHS programs where item exists P2 = proportion of RHS programs where item exists COM = Common category MAJ = Majority category C1 = confidence interval = .05 level of significance 14. 15. 16. 20. 21. "Performance Contracting" (contracting with the stu- dent concerning volume and content of his work for a course) is a major teaching strategy in the pro- gram. If a student does not complete a course by the end of the school year, he will continue the course where he left off when he begins the next year. More emphasis is placed on student credit earned rather than on grades achieved. There is no academic competition between students. The student load for each teacher averages between 15 to 20 students. The teachers have an extensive understanding of how skills and concepts are gained through the many con- tent areas (Industrial Arts, sewing, botany, etc.) of the curriculum. At least three staff members meet a minimum of once every four weeks to evaluate each students' prog- ress. 58 23. The total staff interacts to meet the needs of any one or all of the students. 29. The program is also designed for highly motivated and politically minded students (students who want a say in curriculum and operational policy). 30. Smoking is allowed in some part of the school building. 32. The social environment of the school has equal consideration with the school's academic environ- ment (by the staff). Table IV-lO on the following page reveals the comparison by category. The categorical differences are unknown since either P1 or P2 in each case has an unknown ranking. Since the confidence interval of an unknown ranking of an item for a group straddles the .50 level of existence, the item could fall into the majority or minority category for that group. It is probable therefore that the group with the unknown ranking for the item differs from the group with the known category. Also, no categorical differences could exist between groups. The statistical potential for dif— ferences exists as well as the potential for the groups to be similar. Three items polarized enough to create confidence intervals which did not overlap. These were: 3. The student selects a teacher who will guide his program through his high school experience. 8. If a student does not complete a course by the end of the school year, he will continue the course where he left off when he begins the next year. 16. The student load for each teacher averages between 15 to 20 students. 59 TABLE IV-IO CHARACTERISTICS WHICH SHOWED POTENTIAL OF FALLING INTO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES FOR AHS AND RHS PROGRAMS Item # P1 P2 RANKING CAT CL a CAT C1 “ 2 MAJ .59 - .89 UNK .43 - .72 * 3 UNK .41 - .74 MIN .05 - .30 * 5 UNK .36 - .69 MIN .14 - .45 * 8 UNK .34 - .74 MIN .04 - .24 * l4 MAJ .63 - .91 UNK .32 - .67 * 15 UNK .33 - .59 MIN .10 - .39 * 16 UNK .27 - .60 MIN .03 - .26 * 20 UNK .47 — .88 MAJ .50 - .82 * 21 UNK .27 - .63 MIN .06 - .33 * 23 MAJ .55 - .85 UNK .45 - .78 * 29 MAJ .59 - .89 UNK .37 - .73 * 30 UNK .30 - .66 MIN .11 - .39 * 32 MAJ .62 - .87 UNK .47 - .79 * P1 = proportion of AHS programs where item exists P2 = proportion of RHS programs where item exists CAT = category C1 = confidence interval MAJ = Majority category MIN = Minority category UNK = category is unknown insufficient evidence for evaluating Ho .05 level of significance Table IV-ll shows the results of testing Null Hypothe- sis #2 based on the criterion of overlapping confidence intervals. P2 in each case had low levels of existence while Pl had higher levels of existence and a wider span within each confidence interval. exist in items 3 and 8. The strongest differences 60 TABLE IV-ll COMPARISON OF CHARACTERISTICS IN EACH GROUP WHERE CONFIDENCE INTERVALS DID NOT OVERLAP Item # P1 P2 Ho Cenfidence Interval a Confidence Interval s 3 .41 - .74 .05 - .30 Reject 8 .34 - .74 .04 - .29 Reject 16 .27 - .60 .03 - .26 Reject P1 = proportion of AHS programs where item exists '0 M II proportion of RHS programs where item exists a = .05 level of significance Seventeen (17) items fell into the same category for P1 and P2. These were: 1. The student receives a battery of diagnostic tests within two to three weeks after his enrollment. The results help to determine his course of study. 4. The school staff functions as a team with the principal functioning as team leader. 6. The same day a student completes a course, he re- ceives a grade and goes on to the next course in his course of study. 7. Home study (taking a high school course while stay- ing home) is one part of the total program. 9. Graduation for a student takes place at the time he completes his required work. 10. Programmed materials make up a good portion of the academic materials in the school program. 11. Reading skills are part of the instructional program. 12. Work experience (on-the-job training of students in part-time jobs pre-arranged by the school) is part of the program. 61 13. The school arranges to offer almost any course needed or desired by students. 17. The teachers have a functional understanding of a vast variety of materials, their conceptual and reading levels, and content. 19. Books and other materials vary as much as three different reading levels for any given course. 24. The school teachers are generalists. 25. The school involves the community, sharing re— sources with it. The community is made an opera- tional part of the program where possible. 26. Students or their families have input into almost all phases of the program. 27. School curriculum and staff effort focus on skill development of students in the areas of social skills (living with others), skills in meeting one's interests, and skills in meeting basic needs. 28. Corporal punishment is not practiced in the school. 31. There are periodic rap sessions or clinics which allow student discussion on matters that concern them. Table IV—12 shows the categorical comparisons. Items 6, 7, 9, l9 and 24 have unknown classifications in both groups. The evidence for prediction of existence is least for these five items. Both groups were examined for the total number of items per category. Table IV-13 on page 63 reveals the findings. 62 TABLE IV-12 COMPARISON OF CHARACTERISTICS WHICH FELL INTO SAME CATEGORY FOR AHS AND RHS PROGRAMS Category Item # C1 - Pl a Cl - P2 a Ho Common 4 .75 .97 .89 - 1.00 * 11 .91 1.00 .83 - .99 * Majority 12 .57 .87 .72 - .96 * 13 .63 °91 .50 - .83 * 17 .60 .87 .53 - .85 * 25 .63 .91 .68 - .94 * 26 .53 .83 .51 - .83 * 27 .73 .96 .66 - .93 * 28 .69 .94 .57 - .86 * 31 .73 .96 .73 - .96 * Minority 1 .13 .43 .12 - .42 * 10 .13 .48 .09 - .37 * Rare None -- -- -— —- - Unknown 6 .17 .52 .18 - .52 ** 7 .22 .56 .43 - .72 ** 9 .44 .75 .38 - .72 ** 19 .49 .81 .33 - .67 ** 24 .37 .74 .17 - .53 ** s = .05 level of significance P1 = proportion of AHS programs where item exists P2 = proportion of RHS programs where item exists C1 = confidence interval * = not rejected ** = insufficient evidence for evaluation of Ho 63 TABLE IV-13 NUMBER OF CHARACTERISTICS PER CATEGORY FOR BOTH SAMPLES l 2 Category # % # % % Difference Common 3 9 3 9 0 Majority 14 44 10 31 13 Minority 2 6 9 28 22 Rare 0 0 0 O 0 Unknown 13 41 10 32 10 # = number of items in the category % = percent of items in the category P1 = AHS sample P2 = RHS sample Null Hypothesis #3 B 11 12 Legend: B = Response B Pi1 = proportion in ith category of AHS admin- istrators Pi2 = proportion in ith category of RHS admin- istrators An item analysis was then conducted for both groups for Response B. Chi Square was applied to compare the groups at the .05, .01, and .001 levels of significance. The follow- ing items were found to have significant differences. 1. The student receives a battery of diagnostic tests within two to three weeks after his enrollment. The results help to determine his course of study. 3. The student selects a teacher who will guide his program through his high school experience. 64 5. "Performance Contracting" (contracting with the stu- dent concerning volume and content of his work for a course) is a major teaching strategy in the program. 8. If a student does not complete a course by the end of the school year, he will continue the course where he left off when he begins the next year. 14. More emphasis is placed on student credit earned rather than on grades achieved. 15. There is no academic competition between students. 17. The teachers have a functional understanding of a vast variety of materials, their conceptual and reading levels, and content value. 18. The attitudes possessed by the teachers are, "I really care"; "I have time for you"; patience; under- standing; acceptance for who you are; a real desire to help and meet the needs of students; interest in students' personal lives; and ability to converse on the students' plane. 21. At least three staff members meet a minimum of once every four weeks to evaluate each student's progress. 24. The school teachers are generalists. 27. School curriculum and staff effort focus on skill development of students in the areas of social skills (living with others), skills in meeting one's inter- ests, and skills in meeting basic needs. 30. Smoking is allowed in some part of the school build- ing. Table IV-l4 reveals the comparison of the items. The items were then examined at the .10 level of con- fidence and Table IV-15 reveals the items and their differ- ences. In items ll, 19, 28 and 29, the AHS group rated each item higher in value than did the RHS group while item 7 received a higher rating by the RHS administrators. 65 TABLE IV*14 CHARACTERISTICS IN WHICH SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES EXISTED BETWEEN OPINIONS OF AHS AND RHS ADMINISTRATORS Item # df x2 Statistic Ho 1 2 6.00 * Reject 3 2 12.90 ** Reject 5 2 8.74 * Reject 8 2 8.29 * Reject l4 2 11.54 ** Reject 15 2 8.75 * Reject 17 1 7.77 ** Reject 18 l 4.52 * Reject 21 2 12.30 * Reject 24 2 8.62 * Reject 27 l 5.70 * Reject 30 2 14.76 *** Reject * = significant at .05 level ** = significant at .01 level *** = significant at .001 level df = degrees of freedom TABLE IV-15 ITEMS WHERE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES EXISTED AT THE .10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Item # df x2 Statistic Ho Directionality 7 2 4.67 Reject V1 < V2 11 1 2.85 Reject Vl > V2 19 l 3.59 Reject Vl > V2 28 2 5.46 Reject Vl > V2 29 2 5.12 Reject vl > v2 df = degrees of freedom V1 = overall value placed on the item by AHS group V2 = overall value placed on the item by RHS group 66 The items were then examined for interaction between Responses A and B and for directionality to test the Alter- nate Hypothesis. Simple percentages and an index of impor- tance were used to determine the direction of the results of Response B for items that showed differences at the .05 level of significance. The following steps were taken in the calculations: 1. The percentage of responses was calculated for each of the six cells for each item. 2. The "essential" category was given a value of 3, the "desirable" category a value of 2, and the collapsed category of "undesirable" and "unacceptable" a value of one. 3. For each group, each cell percentage was multiplied by the value of its category and then the three weighted values were added to produce a total weighted value for the item. 4. The values for each group were then compared with the higher number indicating a more positive opinion placed on the item by the respective group. The values will be included in the tables. The potential weighted percentages of the categories formed a range from 300 to 100. Figure 1 shows the index. Figure l 300 234 166 100 l 1 l l ' Essential ' Desirable r’ Undesirable 1 I 1 Unacceptable One hundred percent (100%) of responses falling into the "essential" category would produce a value of 300, and 100% in the lowest category would produce a value of 100. 67 Alternate Hypothesis V13 > V23 Legend: Vl overall value placed on item by AHS group V2 overall value placed on item by RHS group B = Response B As mentioned previously, 12 items contained significant differences at the .05 alpha level for Response B. These items were tested for directionality. Table IV-16 on page 68 reveals the results. All items but number one showed higher responses in the AHS group. The alternate hypothesis was accepted. The weighted values for both groups fell into the same category for 9 of the 12 items. In most of the cases, the differ- ences between groups were found to be a strong response by one group and a weak response by the other within the same category for the item. The difference between groups for item 18 was found within the upper half of the "essential" category on the index. Item 15 showed the strongest dif- ference based upon weighted percentage criteria. Examination of the relationship between Responses A and B revealed that there was no apparent interaction between responses. Items which proved significantly different be- tween groups for Response B were scattered throughout the 32 items. The opinions expressed by respondents showed no evidence of being related to the existence of the item in their programs. 68 TABLE IV-16 COMPARISON OF GROUPS FOR DIRECTIONALITY ON ITEMS WHICH REVEALED DIFFERENCES IN RESPONSE B AT THE .05 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AHS RHS Item # Value Category Value Category Results 1 182 D- 204 D+ Vl < V2 3 225 D+ 172 D- Vl > V2 5 203 D+ 171 D- Vl > V2 8 216 D+ 168 D- Vl > V2 14 227 D+ 186 D- Vl > V2 15 217 D+ 100 U- Vl > V2 17 274 E+ 242 E+ Vl > V2 18 292 E+ 274 E+ Vl > V2 21 234 E- 202 D+ Vl > V2 24 218 D+ 170 D- Vl > V2 27 271 E+ 250 E- V1 > V2 30 178 D- 132 U- V > V l 2 value = the sum of the weighted percentages Vl = overall value placed on the item by the AHS group V2 = overall value placed on the item by the RHS group E = essential category D = desirable category U = undesirable and unacceptable category + = strong overall categorical response weak overall categorical response The results of the x2 test at the .05 level of sig- nificance for Response B was summarized. Table IV-l7 on the following page shows the totals. 69 TABLE IV-17 TOTAL OF THE X2 TEST AT THE .05 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE s = .05 V1B > V2B V1B < V2B NSD Total Items 12 11 l 20 Percent 38% 34% 4% 62% Vl = overall value placed on item by AHS group v2 = overall value placed on item by RHS group B = Response B NSD = items with no significant differences between groups Discussion The first hypothesis predicted the existence of common elements in the AHS population. Although items 4, 11, and 18 were found to be common for the AHS group, items 4 and 11 were also found to be common in the RHS group. Both groups had reading skills as part of their programs. Each saw the faculty as a team with the principal working as the team leader. Differences between groups for Response A were few and weak based upon categorical criteria. Item 18 was common for the AHS group with a confidence interval of .76 - .97 and the RHS group had a confidence interval of .73 - .97. A difference existed based on the criteria for difference set down in the study, however, the statistical differences were weak. An expanded sample may have shown no difference 70 at all. It is apparent that the proportion of administra- tors who perceived their staff as having the personal qualifications mentioned in item 18 were extremely high for both groups. A significant difference between the two groups was found in the opinions regarding the character- istic. Ninety-two percent (92%) of AHS administrators felt it was essential against 74% of RHS administrators. The discrepancy between Responses A and B for item 18 could be caused by the nature of the item. The claim that your staff does not possess the humanistic characteristics mentioned in the item is to cast a negative reflection on you, your program, and your staff. If the characteristics are not there, reasons for not stating so could be strong enough to influence the accuracy of the responses. Item 22 proved to be common for the RHS group and majority for the AHS group. The focus of program success on personal and human characteristics possessed by the staff was a characteristic with a high proportion of existence in the RHS group. The content caf the item is similar to item 18 and yet was reversed in responses between groups. Reasons for the flip-flop results are not apparent. Though the two items differed categorically between groups, the confidence intervals overlapped in each case, meaning the proportion of existence could be the same in both groups. Item 27 which examines the schools'focus on developing social skills and skills in meeting one's interests and 71 basic needs was a characteristic which fell into the same category for both groups. The confidence intervals of the AHS group, however, bordered on the common category indi— cating a possible categorical difference between groups if a retest occurred with a larger sample. Though there is no assurance that this proportion would remain the same in a larger sample, there is evidence that the item would become common to the AHS group. Differences also show up in the strength of the Opinions of both groups. Seventy-four per— cent (74%) of the AHS group felt the item was essential as compared to 50% of the RHS principals. Item 31 for the AHS group bordered on being common, however, it also bordered on being common for the RHS group. The evidence indicates that periodic rap sessions exist in substantial quantity in both groups. Conversely, item 12 regarding work experience arranged by the school borders on being a common item in the RHS population as opposed to being much weaker in the probabil- ity of existence in the AHS group. Three items that were strongly significant in their differences between groups for Response A were items 3, 8, and 16, as measured by differences between confidence inter- vals. All three were characteristics concerning policy and had a higher frequency of existence in the AHS group. The confidence intervals for the AHS group flirted with the common, majority, and.minority categories while in the RHS 72 group the items showed signs of being rare or a weak minor- ity in frequency of existence. Though the category for each characteristic is not known, AHS programs are more apt to house policies which include students selecting the teacher who will guide his/her program, courses whose length is not controlled by the length of the school year, and low student-teacher ratios. AHS administrators also felt sig- nificantly stronger about items 3 and 8 than did RHS admin- istrators. The difference <1f opinion between groups regarding students selecting a teacher to guide his/her pro- gram was significant at the .01 level. The combination of Responses A and B on items 3 and 8 indicates that the characteristics are definite steps away from traditional high school education. Based on the evidence, the previous statement can not yet be made about student-teacher ratios. Other items which possessed significant differences be- tween groups for Response B showed no relationship to cate- gorical differences in Response A, but a pattern appeared in the confidence intervals for the items. The two groups differed significantly at the .05 alpha level for items 5 and 15. AHS administrators placed higher values on perform— ance contracting (5) and the absence of academic competition in the school program (15) than did RHS administrators. The two groups also differed at the .01 level of signifi- cance on items 14 and 21. Emphasis on credit over grades (14) and staff meeting at least monthly to evaluate student 73 progress (21) were characteristics which were favored more strongly by AHS administrators. In all four items, the confidence intervals in Response A showed a potential of polarizing. Item 5 received a low RHS response of existence (C1 = .14 - .45), and a slightly higher response by the AHS group (C1 = .36 - .69). Item 15 had a RHS proportion of existence of .10 - .39 and an AHS proportion of .33 - .59. The two items which had stronger differences of opinion in Response B had confidence intervals with differences of 14: RHS = .32 - .67; AHS = .63 - .91 and 21: RHS = .06 - .33;- AHS = .27 - .63. In all cases, there is an indication of a higher proportion of existence in the AHS program, and a definite higher value placed on the characteristic by AHS administrators. Though significant differences do not exist for Response A, the evidence is strong enough to expect differences in subsequent and larger samplings. The char~ acteristics carry enough weight to merit further study. The strongest difference of opinion between groups was concerning item 30. AHS administrators were more favorable and differed from the RHS group at the .001 level of sig— nificance. Smoking being allowed in a school building showed strong evidence of being controversial. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of AHS administrators favored it while 79% of RHS administrators responded negatively to the item. The existence of the practice was in a minority for the RHS group (C1 = .11 - .39) while its categorical existence was 74 unknown in the AHS group (C1 = .30 - .66). As with items 14 and 21, the existence of item 30 showed signs of polariz- ing between groups. The same expectation is therefore expected of item 30 in subsequent samplings as with the other two items. Item 1 was the one item which most strongly favored the RHS group in Response B. The student's receiving a battery of diagnostic tests upon entering the school is a practice that was in the minority for both programs. The confidence intervals are almost identical (AHS = .13 - .43; RHS = .12 - .42). Only 18% of the AHS group and 17% of the RHS group felt the item was essential while 71% of the RHS group felt it was important as compared to 47% of the AHS group. Thirty-four percent (34%) of the AHS group, however, re- sponded negatively to the item. Diagnostic tests may well represent the structured impersonal aspects of traditional education in the eyes of many AHS administrators. A substantial number of items contained categorical unknowns for Response A. Excluding items 3, 8, and 16, which reveal differences through polarity of their con- fidence intervals, 10 items contained categorical unknowns for one of the two groups and 5 were unclassified in both groups. The power of the small sample was insufficient to determine into which category each would fall. An expanded sample would better determine differences. 75 In the items that revealed significant differences at the .01 level, there was no relationship between Responses A and B. Characteristics were examined at the .10 level of existence in this study to reveal additional items which may show stronger differences between groups in subsequent and larger samplings. Also it might be expected that the AHS group would generally respond more positively to the items since this group responded more favorably in this study. Overall, items where significant differences existed between groups in opinions of administrators, the AHS favored more strongly the characteristics. Eleven (11) out of 12 items were rated higher by the AHS group at the .05 level of significance, 4 out of 4 at the .01 alpha level, item 30 at the .001 level, and 4 out of 5 at the .10 level of significance. Generally there was no interaction found between Responses A and B. Whether or not the item existed in the AHS or RHS programs had little bearing on the opinions of the administrators regarding the value of the item in the program. Those items which showed tendencies for signifi— cant differences in both responses were related to polari- zation of confidence intervals and not categorical differ- ences. Three variables played roles in the outcome of the results: the sample size, the instrument, and demographic factors. The sample size was large enough to provide 76 indications but too small to provide fixed conclusions. Precise differences were not detectable. A substantial number of items showed potential differences but the strength of the sample size was not enough to fully polarize the groups. The refinement of the instrument also became a factor. The items chosen may have been atypical while others in the original list could have been more representative. Third, the demographic variables played an unknown role in the results. The length of time as an administrator, the freedom for decision-making allowed schools by central administration, the philosophical background of administra- tors, the length of time a school had been operational, and the type of communities being served were a few of the many possible variables that could have influenced the responses of administrators. However, no matter what these factors may be, the realities are that what presently exists in a school and what presently an administrator's and staff's philosophy are most greatly influence the experiences that students will have in that program. Summary Confidence intervals at the 95% level of confidence were applied to Response A of the data to test Hypotheses #1 and #2. Hypothesis #1 predicted that common characteristics existed in the AHS programs. Items 4, 11, and 18 were 77 found to be common. However, the school staff's functioning as a team (4) and reading skills as part of the instruction- al program (11) were characteristics common to the RHS group as well as the AHS group. Item 18 was categorically differ- ent between groups but differences were statistically weak. Hypothesis #2 predicted differences in Response A be- tween the AHS and RHS groups based on categorical differ- ences and separation of confidence intervals. Numbers 18 and 22 were the two items that differed categorically with the AHS group responding more favorably to item 18 and the RHS to item 22. The items were related in content yet the responses categorically were reversed. The differences between groups were weak for both items. The greatest strength in differences was based on the separation of confidence intervals. Students selecting a teacher to guide their programs (3), picking up a course where the student left off before summer break (8), and low student-teacher ratios (16) were items which differed sig- nificantly between groups. Higher proportions of existence were found in the AHS group. Items 3 and 8 also were favored significantly higher in Response B by the AHS group over the RHS group. The two items were definite steps away from traditional high school practice. Performance con- tracting (5), emphasis on student credit over grades (14), no academic competition (15), the staff meeting at least monthly to evaluate student progress (21), and smoking being 78 allowed in the school building (30) were characteristics which showed strong potential of being unique to alternative high school education. Hypothesis #3 predicted differences in opinions between groups on items. Chi Square was applied to Response B to test for differences. Five (5) items were found to be sig- nificantly different between groups at the .10 alpha level and 12 items at the .05 level. Of the 12 items, 4 were sig- nificant at the .01 level, and one at the .001 alpha level. The alternate hypothesis predicted that the AHS adminis- trators would place higher value on the items over the RHS administrators. Eleven (11) of the 12 items at the .05 alpha level and 4 of the 5 at the .10 alpha level proved the alternate to be correct. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary A comparative study was conducted to: (1) test and compare the existence of common characteristics of high school education in Alternative High Schools (AHS) and Regular High Schools (RHS); (2) compare the opinions of AHS administrators to opinions of RHS administrators concerning these characteristics. The literature was reviewed to establish a theoretical base for the study. Since little published research has been conducted in Alternative Education, a foundation for the study was laid by examining briefly the philosophical, historical, and methodological facets of the Alternative Education Movement in public schools. Public alternative education has adopted the philosophy of its predecessor, the free school movement which began in 1965. The latter was patterned after A. S. Neill's Summer- hill_with influences from Dewey, Montessori, Rousseau, and Freud. The neoprogressive and humanistic philosophy of the free school movement is in direct opposition to the essen- tialistic (Bagley) and behavioralistic (B. F. Skinner) philosophy found in traditional public education. 79 80 Educational disciples of both camps agree that present pro- cedures in schooling need changing, but there is strong disagreement as to how the change should come about. Historically it was found that humanism or alternatives in public education are not new. The new form came in 1965 as a backlash to the failure of education to meet local needs and the needs of minority groups. The free school movement resulted with small private schools cropping up to meet local needs. Institutions in the movement took the form of free schools, open schools, and street academies (storefront schools). Each was designed to provide an alternative to public education. The movement awakened the sleeping giant and public school districts began establishing alternative schools within their systems. These alternatives were patterned after their forerunners, the free schools. It was found that methodologies differ among public alternative programs but in general the immediate task seems to be to provide an option to impersonal, regimented, im- posed, lockstep learning. The concern is a change in climate rather than curriculum. Beyond this commonality, little is known about common elements in public alternative programs. This study sought to address that problem. The research questions were refined into the following hypotheses: 81 Null Hypothesis #1: The characteristics tested are not common in Alternative High School Programs. Null Hypothesis #2: The characteristics tested are not unique to Alternative High School Programs as com- pared to Regular High School Programs. Null Hypothesis #3: Opinions of Alternative High School administrators will not differ from opinions of Regular High School administrators regarding the characteristics tested. Alternate Hypothesis: Alternative High School adminis- trators will place higher value on the character- istics than will the Regular High School adminis— trators. A sample of 75 RHS principals was randomly selected from high schools in the 158 cities of 100,000 plus popula- tion. A sample of 75 AHS administrators was selected from a population of 224 AHS administrators who were members of the National Consortium for Options in Public Education. A questionnaire of 32 characteristics found in Alterna- tive High Schools was sent to subjects in both samples. Each characteristic required two responses. In Response A, the subject marked whether or not the characteristic existed in his/her program. Response B requested an opinion of the characteristic by the subject marking: l. I feel this item is an essential element in good secondary education. 2. I feel this item is desirable but not necessary to good secondary education. 3. I feel this item is undesirable but acceptable in good secondary education. 4. I feel this item is absolutely not acceptable in good secondary education. 82 Confidence intervals at the 95% confidence level were applied to Response A and both samples were evaluated for common characteristics. Characteristics that were not common were placed into the categories of.Majority,.Minority, and Rare, depending on the proportions around which their confidence intervals fell. The two samples were then com— pared on each characteristic. Chi Square was applied to Response B of the character- istics to compare the opinions found in both groups. Finally, interaction between Responses A and B was then examined. The confidence intervals that were applied to Response A of the data tested Hypotheses #1 and #2. Hypothesis #1 predicted that common characteristics existed in the AHS programs. Items 4, 11, and 18 were found to be common. However, the school staff functioning as a team (4) and reading skills as part of the instructional program (11) were characteristics common to the RHS group as well as the AHS group. The characteristic of teachers possessing such attributes as patience, caring, understanding and acceptance (18) was categorically different between groups but differ- ences were statistically weak. Hypothesis #2 predicted differences in Response A be- tween the AHS and RHS groups based on categorical differ- ences and separation of confidence intervals. Numbers 18 and 22 were the two items that differed categorically. 83 The humanistic attitudes found in item 18 had a categorical- ly higher level of existence in the AHS group while the success of the program hinging on the personal and human characteristics of the staff (22) was categorically higher in the RHS group. The items were related in content yet the responses categorically were reversed. The differences be- tween groups were weak for both items. The greatest strength in differences was based on the separation of confidence intervals. Students selecting a teacher to guide their programs (3), picking up a course where the student left off before summer break (8), and low student teacher ratios (16) were items which differed sig- nificantly between groups. Higher proportions of existence were found in the AHS group. Items 3 and 8 also were favored significantly higher in Response B by the AHS group over the RHS group. The two items were definite steps away from traditional high school practice. Performance con- tracting (5), emphasis on student credit over grades (14), no academic competition (15), the staff meeting at least monthly to evaluate student progress (21), and smoking being allowed in the school building (30) were characteristics which showed strong potential of being unique to alternative high school education. Hypothesis #3 predicted differences in opinions between groups on items. Chi Square was applied to Response B to test for differences. Five (5) items were found to be 84 significantly different between groups at the .10 alpha level and 12 items at the .05 level. Of the 12 items, 4 were significant at the .01 level, and one at the .001 alpha level. The alternate hypothesis predicted that the AHS admin- istrators would place higher value on the items over the RHS administrators. Eleven (11) of the 12 items at the .05 alpha level and 4 of the 5 at the .10 alpha level supported the alternate hypothesis. Conclusions 1. The discovery of three characteristics found to be common in Alternative Secondary Education was insignificant since the characteristics were not particularly unique to the AHS movement. 2. Two characteristics possessed by Alternative High School Education were definite steps away from Regular High School Education. These were: students selecting teachers to guide their programs; and courses whose length is not controlled by the length of the school year. AHS programs are more apt to house these practices. 3. Where differences exist between the opinions of AHS and RHS administrators regarding the characteristics stud- ied, the AHS administrators can be expected to respond on the whole more favorably to the characteristics. 4. The value of the study is in the direction that it points for future study. The preliminary evidence uncovered 85 by the study indicated that possible significant differ- ences exist in the areas of performance contracting, emphasis on student credit over grades, no academic competi- tion, the staff meeting at least monthly to evaluate student progress, and smoking being allowed in the school building. As the evidence mounts, the above characteristics might be expected to be found unique to AHS programs. Recommendations Based on the findings and discoveries made in the several stages of development of the study, the following recommendations are offered. 1. The fourth conclusion stated above indicates areas which show evidence of differences existing between AHS and RHS programs. It is recommended that the characteristics be further examined for their uniqueness to Alternative High School Education. 2. It is recommended that traits believed to be des- criptive of humanistic practice be refined into observable, measurable characteristics. Humanism is still the hub of the AHS movement. If that is what makes it unique, ways of measuring humanism must be determined. 3. A third recommendation is that a conservative pos- ture be maintained in investigating differences be- tween AHS and RHS programs. If claims of unique- ness are to be substantiated, guards must be kept to insure the discovery of real differences. 4. Finally it is recommended that the need expressed by Mike Hickey be heeded and the solution sought be well-thoughout research. That need is: "Careful study of successful practices in alterna- tive schools, coupled with the development of a group of advisors who can help others learn from 86 these successes are both essential if the alterna- tive school movement is to be more than another in the long series of educational fads."1 1Mike Hickey, "Alternative Education and Public Schools: Is Peaceful Cohabitation Possible?" Changing Schools News- letter, No. 003. APPENDICES APPENDIX A SURVEY ANNOUNCEMENT NASP, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS 87 88 NATIONAL SURVEY 0 PUBLIC ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS 19734974 survey questionnoire The National Alternative Schools Program at the University of Massachusetts is conducting an intensive nationwide survey of public alternative schools. One of the data c01- Tection instruments being used is the survey questionnaire. The purpose of this instrument is to deve10p a comprehensive picture of the alternative school. All information collected is confidential. We appreciate your cooperation in filling out this questionnaire. GENERAL DIRECTIONS: To facilitate both the compilation and analysis of questionnaire data NASP has designed a multiple choice, short answer format. There are three types of questions: 1. (circle one/circle all choices which apply) For these questions circle only the appropriate number(s). 2. (please specify) For these questions please enter the appropriate number, percentage, or short phrase clearly in the space provided. 3. grids-- For these questions mark the appropriate cells in the grid with a check. We feel the information generated by the grids will justify the time spent in completing them. Please remember that this questionnaire is designed to get information about how the school is and not how you would like to see it. Thank you very much again for your time. APPENDIX B SURVEY ANNOUNCEMENT NCOPE, INDIANA UNIVERSITY 89. 90 INDIANA UNIVERSITY School of Education mourn-no» ‘lunomo lLOOHlNGTOfl. INDIANA 4740! in. no. ou— Dear Colleague: The National Consortium on Options in Public Education is develop- ing a continuing Directory of Alternative Public Schools which will appear occasionally in the Consortium Newsletter Changing Schools. The first Directory installment begins with the fall, 1973 issue, with later supplements appearing as they are developed. Since there is almost no available information on alternative public schools, it is absolutely essential that we have the most up to date and accurate information we can obtain. For this reason, I am writing you to help us in this effort. Would you please send us a description of the alternative public school with which you are affiliated? We are especially interested in learning the type of school, the number of students involved, grade levels, how your students are selected, and when the school was started. This will enable us to include your school in our next Directory sup- plement. If you know of other alternative public schools in your area, please send their mailing addresses so that we can check our files and make sure that they too are included. Your prompt attention is appreciated. Sincerely, Robert D. Barr Vernon H. Smith Daniel J. Burke, co-directors NCOPE kw P.S. Please return information to: NCOPE Directory Indiana University School of Education 328 Bloomington, Indiana 47401 APPENDIX C REGIONAL BREAKDOWN BY STATE 91 92 REGIONAL BREAKDOWN BY STATE New England Middle Atlantic Maine New York New Hampshire New Jersey Vermont Pennsylvania Massachusetts Delaware Rhode Island .Maryland Connecticut East Central Southern Kentucky Alabama Tennessee _ Arkansas west Virginia Florida Georgia North Central South Carolina Indiana North Carolina Illinois Louisiana Michigan Mississippi Ohio Virginia Minnesota Wisconsin Plains North Dakota South Western South Dakota Texas Iowa New Mexico Kansas Arizona Nebraska California Missouri Oklahoma Western North Western Colorado Idaho Nevada Montana Utah Oregon Wyoming Washington APPENDIX D ALTERNATIVE HIGH SCHOOL DATA SHEET 93 94 Alternative High School Data Sheet Program 1. 2. 3. Director: Address & phone: Enrollment: Philosophy Una-cowh- Perceptions of needs: Perceptions of drop—outs: Alternative Education: Stigma of program: Learning philosophy: Goals abbJNl-J 0 Needs to be met: Characteristics of graduates: Specific objectives: Vocational, Academic, Personality: Instruction QOU'Ish-wNI-J O Student-teacher ratio: Methodologies: Staffing patterns: Flexibility: Open vs closed classroom: Effectiveness of instruction: Hours of operation: Rules (smoking) Curriculum l. 2. \oooxloxmbw 0 Vocational: Academic: Judicial: Involvement of Business & Industry: Community Involvement: Student participation in planning: Functional Schedules & breaks: Role of students: 95 Community Commitment 1. Business & Industry: 2. Professions: 3. Courts: 4. Jobs available: Family,Commitment 1. Relationship with parents: 2. Parental input: Reward System 1. Certificate and degree program: 2. Job placement: 3. Counseling services: 4 . GED 5. Follow-up on students: Characteristics of Students 1. Economic: 2. Ethnic: 3. Value structure: 4. Mobility patterns: 5. Residential: 6. Family characteristics: 7. Institutional attitudes: 8. Time and space perceptions: Administration 1. Staffing patterns: 2. Evaluation: 3. Entrance criteria: 4. Transportation: 5. Paper work: 6. Transportation: 7. How they got there: Budget 1. Program costs: 2. Maintenance: 3. Meals: 4. Transportation & phones: 96 Resources Local: Human: Funding: Equipment: bWNl—J Experimental Efforts l. Innovations: APPENDIX E QUESTIONNAIRE WITH EXPLANATORY LETTERS 97 98 TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77843 Office of Douglas C. Godwin THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION December 10, 1973 Dear Principal: The Flint, Michigan Board of Education, in a move to upgrade its secon— dary education program, commissioned the district administration to pursue new and additional opportunities for high school students in Flint. The administration in turn selected a team from its staff to fulfill the Board's assignment. The team visited eleven midwestern schools which claimed tO embrace mean- ingful innovations, philosophies, methodologies, unique characteristics of students, and curriculum programs. The findings were synthesized and condensed into 200 unique characteristics. These were compared to innovations described in the literature and then further refined. A secondary program was developed based on the results, however, further analysis and input were desired. A research project resulted. As a member of the team, I accepted the responsibility of the study. Though I'm presently on the faculty at Texas A&M, I remain committed to the district for this project. Attached is a questionnaire which contains 32 items synthesized from our findings. Your input will be of value to the study and will be held in strictest confidence. Will you please assist us by taking approximately twenty minutes and responding candidly to the question- naire? Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Would you make our Christmas an extra special one this year by helping us meet our mid-year timetable by mailing back the questionnaire in the enclosed envelope by December 23. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, Douglas C. Godwin Assistant Professor 99 TEXAS A&.M UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77843 Office of Douglas C. Godwin Tm: DEPARTMENT or EDUCATIONAL CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION January 3, 1974 Dear Principal: I hope this letter finds you having enjoyed an excellent and refreshing Holiday Season. Such breaks give us the chance to deal with our own energy crises. Just before Christmas I sent you a questionnaire that related to a study being conducted for the Flint, Michigan Board of Education on practices in Secondary Education. I am sincerely interested in adding your point of view to the data before we tabulate the results. Please help us get an accurate picture by taking a few minutes to respond and return the questionnaire. If perchance you did not receive it and are willing to respond for us, please return the enclosed postcard, and I'll send you a copy. Thanks for your participation and have a happy New Year. Sincerely, Douglas C. Godwin Assistant Professor 100 SECONDARY EDUCATION QUESTIONNAIRE Following is a list of methods, curriculum practices, philosophies, and student characteristics observed in secondary schools. 1. Would you please check whether or not each item a§_stated exists presently in your school. 2. Would you then evaluate the item's worth to gggd_secondary education as you perceive good secondary education. Such evalu- ation will be based on the following four criteria: (1) I feel this item is an essential element in good secondary education. (2) I feel this item is desirable but not necessary in good secondary education. (3) I feel this item is undesirable but acceptable in good secondary education. (4) I feel this item is absolutely not acceptable in good secondary education. Desirable U) 4.) U) EXAMPLE 5 School dismisses at noon. no This response shows that the item exists in the principal's school .b Not Acceptable Ia Essential I» Undesirable ® I and he (she) feels that it is desirable but not essential for good secondary education. l. 10. 11. 101 The student receives a battery of diagnostic tests within two to three weeks after his en- rollment. The results help to determine his course of study . Each student is interviewed by the principal or a teacher after his enrollment into the school. The student selects a teacher who will guide his program through his high school experience. The school staff functions as a team with the principal functioning as team leader. "Performance Contracting" (contracting with the student concerning volume and content of his work for a course) is a major teaching strategy in the program. The same day a student completes a course, he receives a graee and goes on to the next course in his course Of study. Home study (taking a high school course while staying home) is one part of the total program. If a student does not complete a course by the end of the school year, he will continue the course where he left off when he begins the next year. Graduation for a student takes place at the time he completes his required work. Programmed materials make up a good portion of the academic materials in the school program. Reading skills are part of the instructional program. Exists 3%: OID Ul yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no F. Essential k, Desired u, Undesired a. Not Acceptable 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 102 WOrk experience (on—the—job training of stu— dents in part-time jobs pre-arranged by the school) is part of the program. The school arranges to offer almost any course needed or desired by students. More emphasis is placed on student credit earned rather than on grades achieved. There is no academic competition between students. The student load for each teacher averages between 15 to 20 students. The teachers have a functional understanding of a vast variety of materials, their con- ceptual and reading levels, and content value. The attitudes possessed by the teachers are, "I really care"; "I have time for you"; patience; understanding; acceptance for who you are; a real desire to help and meet the needs of students; interest in students' per- sonal lives; and ability to converse on the students' plane. Books and other materials vary as much as three different reading levels for any given course. The teachers have an extensive understanding of how skills and concepts are gained through the many content areas (Industrial Arts, sewing, botany, etc.) of the curriculum. At least three staff members meet a minimum of once every four weeks to evaluate each studenth progress. Exists yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no H Essential Desirable M (A Undesirable A Not Acceptable 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 103 NO matter what is the nature of the program, the key to the success of that program is the personal and human characteristics possessed by the staff. The total staff interacts to meet the needs of any one or all of the students. The school teachers are generalists. The school involves the community, sharing resources with it. The community is made an operational part of the program where possible. Students or their families have input into almost all phases of the program. School curriculum and staff effort focus on skill development of students in the areas of social skills (living with others), skills in meeting one's interests, and skills in meeting basic needs. Corporal punishment is not practiced in the school. The program is also designed for highly moti- vated and politically minded students (students who want a say in curriculum and operational policy). Smoking is allowed in some part of the school building. There are periodic rap sessions or clinics which allow student discussion on matters that concern them. The social environment of the school has equal consideration with the school's academic environment (by the staff). Exists no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no yes no Ia Essential R: Desirable I» Undesirable .b NOt Acceptable BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Elliot, Norman F. Patterson's American Education. Mount Prospect, Illinois: Education Directories Inc., 1973. Good, Carter V. Dictionary of Education. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1973. Guralnik, David B., Editor in Chief. Webster's New World Dictionary, Second College Edition. The World Publish- ing Co., 1972. Howe, M. A. DeWolfe. The Life and Letters of George Bancroft I. New York: Charles Scribner's and Sons, 1908. Illich, Ivan. Deschooling Society. New York: Harper Rowe, 1971. Lerner, William. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 99th Edition. Bureau of the Census, U. 8. Dept. of Commerce, 1973. Nye, Russel B. George Bancroft. New York: Washington Square Press, 1964. Passow, A. Harry. Opening Opportunities for Disadvantaged Learners. New York: Teachers College Press, 1972. PERIODICALS Barr, Robert; Vernon H. Smith; Daniel J. Burke. "All About Alternatives," Nation's Schools Vol. 90 (November 1972), 33-9. Beauchamp, Edward R. "An American GYMNASIUM: The Round Hill School, 1823-34," Educational Forum Vol. 37 (January 1973), 159-67. Edwards, Conan S. "Developing Alternatives in Education," NAASP Bulletin Vol. 56 (May 1972), 132—9. 104 105 Evans, Richard I. "The Free School Movement: Freedom to Learn Badly? Some Psychological Observations," Educational Technology Vol. 12 (January 1972), 40-1. Fremon, Suzanne S. "Why Free Schools Fail," Educational Digest Vol. 38 (December 1972), 17-20. Hickey, Mike. "Alternative Education and Public Schools: Is Peaceful Cohabitation Possible?" Changinngchools Newsletter No. 003. Morse, David. "The Alternative," Media & Methods Vol. 7 (May 1971), 28-34. Nelson, William C. "The Storefront School: A Vehicle for Change," The Journal of Negro Education Vol. 40 (Summer 1971), 248-54. Ofiesh, Gabriel D. and Mary Elizabeth McIlvane. "Educa- tional Technology and the Free School Movement," Educational Technology Vol. 12, No. 1 (January 1972), 68-70. Prete, Anthony. "The Soft Revolutionary," Media & Methods Vol. 9 (September 1972), 35-8. Robinson, Donald W. "'Alternative Schools'; Challenge to Traditional Education?" Phi Delta Kappan Vol. 51 (March 1970), 374-5. Robinson, Donald/W. "Alternative Schools: Do They Promise System Reform?" Phi Delta Kappan LIV, No. 7 (1973). Robinson, DonaldIW./ "Alternative Schools: Is the Old Order Really Changing?" Educational Leadership Vol. 28 (March 1971), 604-7. Robinson, Donald W. "Legitimizing the Revolution," Phi Delta Kappan LIII (February 1972), 400. "Schools Without Walls," Audiovisual Instruction (September 1972). Skinner, B. "Contingency Management in the Classroom," Education Vol. 90 (1969), 93. Smith, Joshua L. "Free Schools: Pandora's Box?" Educational Leadership Vol. 28 (February 1971), 464-8. Smith, Vernon H. "Alternative Pukflic Schools," Education Digest Vol. 39 (December 1973), 2-4. 106 Smith Vernon H. "Options in Public Education: The Quiet Revolution," Phi Delta Kappan LIV, No. 7 (1973). Stretch, Bonnie Barrett. "The Rise of the Free School," Saturday Review Vol. 53 (June 1970), 76-9. Trow, wm. Clark. "Alternative or Needs--An Epilogue to This Issue," Educational Technology Vol. 12, No. 1 (January 1972), 77-8. PAMPHLETS Donohue, John W. and Douglas Watson. Alternative Schools: Pioneering Districts Create Options for Students. National School Public Relations Association, 1972. UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL Fantini, Mario. Quoted from a speech given at a regional conference on options in public education, Grand Rapids, Michigan, November 1, 1972. "IIlillllllllllllllliS