Exposing the Reality Gap:
Public Expectations and Boston
Public
The High School Journal
December,
2003 -- January, 2004, pp. 7-15
State educational systems are intent on improving standardized test scores (Amrein and Berliner, 2002; Cimbriz, 2002). Although program titles differ, their intentions are remarkably similar -- to improve student test scores and to hold educators accountable. Many secondary educators are disheartened by this approach--not because they resist accountability, but because they recognize that many problems confronting high school students have little to do with standardized test scores (Mendler, 2001). They see the irony of focusing on test scores at a time when students are confronted with, "rising youth violence; . . . sexual precocity; a growing self-centeredness and declining civic responsibility; an increase in self-destructive behavior; and ethical illiteracy" (Lickona, 1993, p. 9).
High
school teachers, themselves, are also
facing new challenges: .
When Evans
(1996)
asked teachers to list their priorities
for school
improvement, he found that teachers
wanted:They complain about low levels of salary,
support,
and recognition; about deteriorating conditions in the schools, and
diminishing readiness among
pupils; and
about growing demands made on them, both instructional and non-instructional. Many
surveys
have shown a sharp decline in teachers' morale and job satisfaction (Evans, 1996, p. 94).
more
time to plan, and prepare and cope with
change, larger budgets for books, and supplies, fewer nonacademic
requirements,
more support from parents and the public, and greater attention to, and
control
over students by their parents. (p. 81)
Discussions about the struggles of high school students and teachers, however, are absent among legislators and policymakers, who focus on raising standardized test scores – a focus which is naïve, and largely irrelevant to the realities of modern high school life. Mendler (2001) noted,
"With teacher accountability increasingly tied to student success as gauged by test performance, many educators experience great stress in simultaneously getting kids to perform while addressing the burdens caused by a toxic world that so often impedes student learning (p. 4).
Unfortunately, the gap between the expectations of policy makers and the issues confronting today’s high school students and teachers has become greater now that the federal government has legislated educational accountability:
Throughout the 1990s, national, state, and local education leaders have focused on raising educational standards and promoting accountability within the educational community. In fact, the promotion of challenging learning standards for all students-coupled with assessment systems that monitor progress and hold schools accountable-has been the centerpiece of the educational policy agenda of the federal government as well as of many states (NASSP, 2002)
The
struggles of
students, teachers, and administrators same ,
however,
are the topics of Boston Public (BP), the Fox network series
set in
fictional Winslow High School (WHS).
Plots involveingst student problems, such as
drug
usage, deal
with suicide and violence, racial slurs, sexual
norms, abuse, and homelessness.
Episodes
Episodes
focusing on dealing
with teacher
issues,
includee
stress from
professional responsibilities, dedication and perseverance
to disenchanted youth, purchasing a home on a teacher'slow salarysalaries, the
naïveté
of beginning teachers, and tensions between administrators and teachers.
Furthermore, by also portraying the confusion and dilemmas facing high school leaders, BP illustrates the gap between the public's proclaimed goal of improving test scores and the actual goal of schools striving to be perceived as legitimate in order to acquire resources and survive. Ogawa and Bossert (2000) wrote,
. . . the function of leadership from the technical-rational perspective is organizational performance and goal attainment, the function of leadership from the institutional perspective is social legitimacy and organizational survival (p. 47).
In its portrayal of the dilemmas of high school life, BP recognizes that focusing on improved test scores is the "technical-rational" goal, but legitimacy and survival are the "institutional" goals.
As a metaphor for the realities of modern
high school life, BP raises these and
other important issues. On the other
hand, the state and federal policy emphasis on raising test scores and
holding
teachers accountable reflect the attempts of those outside high schools
to
control public education. Sacks (2000)
pointed out:
. . .
educational considerations have been subordinate to the political
and ideological motivations of politicians and business leaders. These interests have wielded political power
over schools in order to assert their control and demonstrate
preconceived
failures of the school system as the means to sustain that political
control
over schools (p. 8).
BP does a service for all who care
about the education of our youth by
exposing this reality gap – the gap between emphasizing accountability
for
student test scores when those who teach and learn in these
institutions are
increasingly embroiled in issues of adolescent growth that have been
ignored by
families and communities (Evans, 1996).
We live in interesting educational
times. Both those who want vouchers and
competition to infiltrate American public schooling and those who push
for more
equal educational opportunity within our current system seek
significant
changes within schools. The future of
the American public education system may hang in the balance as
legislators
debate the supposed need for vouchers, increased teacher
accountability, and
higher student test scores.
The very existence of this debate raises
questions about the demise of public education, as we have known it. Some doubt that the implementation of a
voucher system would leave behind the students with nobody to advocate
for
them--those students who have the greatest need for a system that
stands firm
in its commitment to equal educational opportunity.
We question whether schools will be better places for children
as
state legislatures and the federal government insist that teachers be
held
accountable for higher student test scores.
The fight is not over, but many educators and
public school proponents feel exhausted.
They are against the ropes and not sure how long they can hold
out
against those who believe that school vouchers and test score based
accountability will improve, not endanger, American public education.
But we have found hope in an unlikely place – in the portrayal of the lives of those who walk the halls of Winslow High School (WHS). Our hope is in the people they represent – all Americans who are committed to equal educational opportunity, even for those who live in poverty and who have special needs. As former teachers and administrators we recognize and appreciate how the show depicts the gap between high school realities, and legislation aimed at holding teachers accountable for higher student test scores.
Although Bozell (2001) condemned BP as
“soft porn for teens,” (p. 16) and “smart smut” (p.
21), we find an accurate, sensitive portrayal of the issues
facing today’s youth. There is irony
in the Parents’ Television Council (PTC) criticism of BP: “at a
time
when the politicians express concern for dismal standardized test
scores and
parents fear for their children’s safety at school, it is sad to see a
program
like Boston Public adding to the problem” (PTC Insider,
2001, p.
4). We disagree with PTC on both
points. The irony is that, because of
the realities of high school life, the political concern is of
questionable
value; and, instead of "adding to the problem," we believe BP
ought to be given credit for portraying the real issues of high school
life.
According to Taylor (2001), "Without doubt, the controversies presented on BP seem improbable. . . Nevertheless, the show's story lines, although greatly enhanced for drama and entertainment purposes, present scenarios that, at their core, parallel legitimate concerns in education law." Furthermore, Lee (2000) points out, "Kelley (the show's producer) is unearthing much of his material from teachers themselves. Some of it is shocking even to him."
High school policies and life have changed
much over the last thirty years (Petronicolos, 1996), and BP
illustrates
many of these changes in its depictions of the struggles of students,
teachers
and administrators. One purpose of this
article is to describe how WHS is a metaphor for the realities of
modern high
school life. Another purpose is to
ask
if, without acknowledging the complex social, psychological, and
emotional
issues that permeate every high school, emphasizing higher test scores
and
teacher accountability is likely to lead to significant improvement in
high
schools.
When looking at WHS as a metaphor for high
school life, several themes emerge. We
will discuss three. One is that high
schools have undergone a power shift. A
second is that, in a society where sexual messages are ubiquitous and
increasingly provocative, the sexual norms and behaviors of teens have
changed. The third is that
adolescent
alienation continues to be a major issue confronting high school
students.
Power
Shifton. [Do we
put this word in quotes?]
To illustrate a power shift in high schools, several BP plots suggest that teachers and administrators have lost power to students. One television critic noted:
. . . teachers and
administrators
at the fictional Winslow High School are in positions of formal
authority but
actually face reversed power relations . . . as students take advantage
of the
ways the teachers’ hands are tied by lawsuits, district politics, and
low
status. (Gamson, 2001, p. 38)
A
student website,
which ridiculed teachers, administrators and students, illustrated
demonstrates
this power
shift. Student Sheryl Holt published
an underground website. Claiming to be
a school reporter, she insisted on her free speech rights.
This situation parallels the long-standing
debate about administrative prior review of high school student
journalism. It also reflects how the
context of that
issue has changed. Instead of involving
school printing presses, and distributing leaflets on school grounds,
the
Internet provides instantaneous, no cost publication in a highly
accessible,
non-school environment.
Throughout
the
country school administrators are confronted with unofficial websites
(Conn,
2001; Matias, 2001). The plots of BP
suggest that high school administrators need to find creative ways to
deal with
the power wielded by technologically savvy students in this new environment.
BP also captured power bartering
between administrators and
students. Bartering {This
trade-off?) was
portrayed in a student-bullying situation. Anthony Ward,
a WHS
student, was physically assaulted and harassed by a group of students. He was trapped inside a locker and
dangled
out a school window. Even after a
public rescue by firemen, Anthony would not tell administrators who was
bullying
him.
When Principal Harper realized Anthony would not tell on his harassers, Sheryl Holt was called to the principal's office. Sheryl lived by the adolescent code of silence, but she eventually agreed to tell what she knew, bartering with Principal Harper, saying, “You owe me” (Kelley, 2000).
Principal Harper's powerlessness was evident
when he asked Sheryl why Anthony would not tell who was harassing him. She replied, “Probably because he thinks you
can’t do anything” (Kelley, 2000). Many
high school administrators, like Harper, are powerless to penetrate
teen culture. Therefore they "can't
do
anything" to address students' perceptions of their needs.
Evans (1996)
commented on
principal
powerlessness:
They become principals in part to "make a difference," to right wrongs and correct flaws that chafed them as teachers, and to assert a vision of schooling as it should be. The first great shock awaiting them is discovering how little power they truly have (p. 150).
BP suggesteds that teachers
have also lost power. A poignant
point in one episode
occurred when, dToward the end of the episode inuring an
assembly to
help students deal with the death of a teacher, another
student
took the stage ,
a
manifestation of student power, and said:
These
teachers can’t help
us. A lot of us are doing drugs; we
think that we need to be having sex to count for something. Faculty tries to motivate us with dreams of
college and making money. They don’t
have a clue of what we are, what we need.
And almost every one of us feels empty. . . and I think what a
lot of us
need to do now is come together and pray.
Maybe we should turn to Him because, let’s face it, these
teachers, our
parents – they can’t do anything.
They’re useless (Kelley, 2000).
[You
may not agree, but I
think this is redundant and interrupts the flow of the plots.]
In these and other episodes, BP illustrates that students exercise power, administrators have little power, and teacher power is dead. A power shift has occurred in high schools, which is one reason why today's schools are different from those of a generation ago.
Zirkel
(1999)
pointed out that, in 1969, Supreme Court Justice He [Al’s edit: Should it be Zirkel on Black?]Black warned of
the
potential for a destructive change in student-teacher relationships:
One dissenting opinion, written by Justice Black, characterized the majority holding as ushering in "an entirely new era" in the student/school relationship -- specifically, one of "revolutionary . . . permissiveness. . . fostered by the judiciary." Black predicted that, as a result of the majority's decision, "some students in Iowa schools, and indeed in all schools will be ready, able, and willing to defy their teachers on practically all orders" -- a particularly troublesome prospect "since groups of students all over the land are running loose, conducting break-ins, sit-ins, lie-ins, and smash-ins" (p. 34).
Although we do not wish to return to the days before 1969, Black's dissenting opinion accurately predicted what has happened in some high schools.
This
development
was recently captured by editorial cartoonist Dick Wright.
Cartoon here. (We
have copyright
permission to use a recently published Dick Wright cartoon, which
depicts this
very change. See enclosed.)
A
different kind of power shift is represented in recent BP
episodes -- administrators gain power when their efforts
lead to higher student test scores.
Curriculum and Instruction Assistant Principal Ronnie Cook's
status rose
after WHS standardized test scores improved.
A recent episode portrayed her glowing in the media spotlight
brought by
higher test scores, illustrating that both the media and administrators
have
independently embraced an exaggeration of the public interest in
student test
scores.
As Ms. Cook was receiving her accolades, veteran administrators Harper and Guber, were in the background, receiving no recognition for their administrative roles. This scene reflects a new reality -- high school administrative power and recognition are tied to achieving higher student test scores. The work on complex, thorny student and staff issues (issues without a bottom line) get little notice, unless something goes wrong.
Acceptance
of Sexual Attitudes
and Behaviors
BP has been criticized for its portrayal of situations, in which
there is sexual
misconduct
among students, and
between teachers and students.
Although BP sensationalized
sex
in its previews for the first two seasons, the show's actual portrayals
of
these situations were not as provocative as the previews suggested.
e.
(MOVED)
WHS students take a casual attitude toward sex (Booth, 2001), while the adults are distraught over the consequences students take so lightly. Lauren Davis, a popular teacher saw two of the student government president candidates engaged in oral sex in the school stairwell. When the male candidate later dropped out of the election and gave his support to the female who performed the sex act, Ms. Davis realized the election and the sexual encounter were related.
Both students denied wrongdoing, and asked Ms. Davis not to tell what she saw. The female candidate explained, “Everyone does it. It is not as if we were kissing or doing anything intimate” (Kelley, 2000).
Ms. Davis insisted that the students see the guidance counselor, but the female candidate continued to deny any wrongdoing. Even after her parents were contacted she explained to Ms. Davis, "You people don't even know what it is like in here. You don't have a clue. . . Kids practice sex in high school, Ms. Davis” (Kelley, 2000).
These comments suggest that even teachers in the schools, are unaware of new teen sexual behaviors and attitudes. Adults need to be aware of what is popular among today's teens as the first step toward helping young people deal with sexual pressures. Holmes (1999) reported:
The Washington Post's front page recently carried the headline "Parents Are Alarmed by an Unsettling New Fad in Middle Schools: Oral Sex."
While the statistics may be improving, sexual practices among teenagers
are becoming increasingly dehumanizing. Consider the phrase "hooking up," a casual reference to casual encounters that is part of the American collegiate vocabulary. Now primary-school students are describing their sexual experimentation in the same impersonal terms. A high-school junior explained to the Atlanta Journal in May that "risky behavior is just something to do when you're bored. Like, um, sex, smoking, stealing, doing drugs. It's just something to do" (p. 48).
High school educators are in a position to help students and families address new norms of popular culture.
Another teenage sexual norms issue was portrayed in a different episode. Principal Harper refused to allow the cheerleading team to perform what he considered an inappropriate competition routine. One of the girls argued, “We don’t do anything they don't do on TV” (Kelley, 2001). Principal Harper countered, “I realize that, Laura, but TV sells sex. I don’t think it is right for a high school cheerleading team to do that” (Kelley, 2001). The cheerleading routine was sexually suggestive in a way that was unacceptable to Mr. Harper.
When this same issue hit Beach High School in Savannah, Georgia, the local school board became involved. Russ Bynum (2001) reported that some school board members believed cheerleading and dance squads were emphasizing sex appeal over school spirit. Others thought the girls should be left alone.
Do
schools have a
responsibility to hold the line against the influence of popular
culture? Schools have a significant impact
on
adolescent sexual behavior (Gaston, 1994; Kirby, 2002).
Even if, "Shaking your rear end is
really common in cheerleading" (Bynum, 2001), it may be true that, as
Principal Harper thought, some dance gestures and routines are
inappropriate
for high school performers.
BP provides a service by reminding adults that, for whatever reasons -- more exposure to sex in the media, different norms for student sexual behavior, or changing norms in the larger society – the sexual behaviors and attitudes of today’s high school students are different from those of earlier generations (Hersch, 1998).
It is disappointing that Parents Television
Council (PTC) seems to deny the realities of modern teen life (PTC
Insider,
2001) while emphasizing student test scores.
In contrast, BP confronts and dramatizes the realities
of modern
adolescent behavior; thereby illustrating
the gap between public expectations for higher student test scores and
the
realities of modern high school life.
Student Alienation
Another theme running throughout the series is that students experience alienation instead of community. Several WHS students are confronted with intensification of the “belonging” issues typical of adolescence (Osterman, 2000).
For example, an artistic student experienced a dilemma related to taking Ritalin. When he took his medicine his behavior was acceptable to peers and teachers, but he lost his music ability. In order to be more accepted by peers, he stayed on his medication. Unfortunately, being accepted meant he was with friends when their car crashed, and he was killed. BP dramatized the cost students sometimes pay for "fitting in."
Alienation is also depicted in a plot about Christine Banks, a heavyweight girl, who was recruited by the coach to wrestle on the school team. Her father discouraged Christine from joining the team because he was afraid she would suffer further humiliation because of her weight. Eventually, however, she became an important member of the team.
Prior to a critical match Christine wanted to quit because her boyfriend did not want to go out with a girl known as "The Blob." Both the wrestling coach and Principal Harper, however, reminded her that she did not have to allow name-calling adolescents to keep her from accomplishment. They challenged her to find the confidence and determination to achieve and fulfill her obligation to the team.
During the heavyweight match, student spectators held signs and chanted, "Go Blob." After winning the match, Christine approached the microphone and told her peers, "My name is not 'The Blob.' My name is Christine Banks" (Kelley, 2001). In this scene BP beautifully portrayed the dignity of this high school girl, who overcame her alienation with the help and encouragement of key adults. Christine's strength, reflected in her ability to ignore the cruelty of peers, was inspiring.
A final example of adolescent isolation is the relegation of underachieving students to “The Dungeon,” an alternative education classroom symbolically located in the high school basement. Harry Senate, their teacher, taught life lessons and connected education to the lives of "Dungeon" students. His purposes conflicted with those of other WHS teachers, but he had good reason to take this approach. Many of these students felt alienated from academic purposes, and some were obsessed with suicidal thoughts.
Jamale, a "Dungeon" student, told Mr. Senate he was picturing how to commit suicide. In response, Mr. Senate formed a “suicide club." When Jamale's mother found out about the suicide discussion in class she asked the teacher: "Can you tell me how you get him to open up and share these things" (Kelley, 2001)? Mr. Senate represents teachers who pay attention to student needs and establish relationships that invite students to "open up" about difficult issues in their lives.
Principal Steven Harper later approached Mr. Senate with parent complaints about the suicide club. Mr. Senate responded, "Tell those parents to come see me. Steven, these kids are feeling isolated. They want to talk. I'm just trying to allow them to" (Kelley, 2001). Although Principal Harper replied that students in the "Dungeon" needed basic math and reading instruction, he allowed Mr. Senate to continue. Principal Harper mouthed the concerns of many in the education establishment, but he realized that, for these students, there are more important issues than standardized test scores.
In powerful, dramatic ways, BP asks adults to compare their adolescent experiences with the struggles of today's teens. BP takes advantage of these adult memories as it dramatizes how times have changed, and how today's culture contributes to student alienation.
Although adolescents have always needed to belong, meeting this need is even more important now (Deci, et al, 1991). With both parents working, adolescents are often home alone for long periods of time. Hersch (1998) wrote: “Being separate at times is quite different in degree from living separate, unknown lives” (p. 399). Many of the student problems at WHS reflect this level of isolation. Rather than blaming parents for this, high schools can contribute to a sense of belonging (Osterman, 2000). BP illustrates how difficult this is, however, when high schools are expected to improve student test scores.
WHS students and teachers function within an out-dated school structure that does not help students become part of a community, where there is a sense of trust and safety (Furman, 1998). When students are alienated, their academic interests are likely to be diverted by their need to survive. Learning is social (Dewey, 1958; Bandura, 1977). Instead of emphasizing test scores, educators ought to build structures that take advantage of the social nature of learning. Unless these structures are built, significant improvement is unlikely from legislation focused on improving student test scores.
Harry Senate is an example of how good teachers connect with their students even though modern high schools make it difficult to do so. This connecting may be sacrificed, however, now that policymakers have defined the classroom as a place where teachers prepare students to score well on standardized tests. According to Mendler (2001),
"they (educators) simply do not have the time it takes to "connect" with kids, because of the time taken from academics. Yet we know that the need to belong is as essential to learning as the need for food is to survival" (p. 6).
BP reminds us that, perhaps, if policymakers directed more attention to student needs for belonging and community, students would be better served.
Conclusion
Policymakers equate higher test scores with higher student achievement. This attitude, however, has narrowed the focus so much that other pertinent issues have been ignored. As the late Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone (2001, p. 10) said, "Politically, high-stakes is the easiest thing to do. . . But it leaves untouched all of the key variables that explain why students do well or don't do well." Unfortunately, too few policymakers share Wellstone's insight.
Across the country educators are putting most of their efforts into what they perceive as the public's expectations for higher student achievement. At the same time, however, teachers regret teaching to the test, administrators dread the publication of their scores in local newspapers, and students suffer most of all through higher drop-our rates, increased suicides, and disenfranchisement from school life. By continuing to stress improved test scores, high schools such as WHS will be perceived as legitimate and will survive. BP asks, however, whether significant improvement will occur without dealing with the tough issues facing today's students.
Demographic data suggest that the issues confronting today's
youth are
more serious than adults imagine.
Mendler (2001) wrote:
Public
schools are the only community institution that must receive and
educate every
child within their boundaries: every learning, physically, and
emotionally
disabled child; everyone who is abused, neglected, undernourished, or
without
guidance; every substance-abusing child; and any child who was affected
in
utero by a drug-using mother. At the
same time that we are awed by the great technological achievements that
occur
daily--and seem to offer great advances in medicine, education, and
communication--children
are more alienated than ever (p. 5).
Furthermore, Troy (2003) reported that 14.4 million students
of the
public school system live in abject poverty, and 7.2 million come to
school
hungry each day; 6 million have disabilities for which public schools
must
compensate; 2 million are abused and neglected at home.
BP captures
how these facts lead to the issues that affect the lives of high school
students and educators.
Intrator (2003) pointed out that today's students present, "a
challenge undreamed of in previous generations of educators" (p.
187). If
this is the case, student achievement should be defined more
broadly than what is reflected in standardized test scores. BP reminds us that high schools
remain places where power is out of balance, student sexual attitudes
and
behaviors are outside acceptable norms, and high school students
continue to be
alienated.
Still,
legislators and
policymakers define student achievement more narrowly than ever before
by
holding allegiance to standardized test
scores. When will they also address the
social, emotional, and economic dilemmas facing students and teachers?
BP portrays the fundamental gap between public expectations for schools and the realities that dominate American public high schools. It is not surprising that this series has been criticized. If it did not offend people, it would not be a realistic portrayal of high school life.
Bibliography
Amrein,
A.L. &
Berliner, D.C. (2002). High-stakes
testing, uncertainty, and student learning.
Article retrieved 4/2/02 from Education Policy Analysis
Archives.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Booth, S. (2001, Nov.1). Oral report: Are girls having oral sex to please the guys? Teen People, 4,145.
FOX TV: Boston Public. Retrieved 11/15/2002. from http://www.fox.com/bostonpublic/homeroom/
Bozell, III, L.B. (2001, Feb 26). Boston Public: Soft porn for teens. Human Events, 57,16.
Bynum, R. (2001, Nov. 3). Georgia schools want to crack down on provocative cheerleading. Asheville Citizen-Times, p.A2.
Cimbriz, S. (2002, Jan. 9). State-mandated testing and teachers beliefs and practice. Education Policy Analysis and Archives. 10 Retrieved 2/29/02 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n2.html.
Conn, K. (2001). Offensive student websites: What should schools do? Educational Leadership, 58, 74-77.
Deci, E.L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 325-346.
Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Evans, R. (1996). The human side of school change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Freedman, S.G. (2000, Dec. 17). A report card for‘ Boston Public’ A’s and F’s. New York Times. p.2:35.
Furman, G. C. (1998). Postmodernism and community in schools: Unraveling the paradox. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(3), 298-328.
Gamson. (2001, February 12). Educational Television. The American Prospect, 12, 38-39.
Gaston,
J., Jensen, L.C.
& Weed, S.E. (1994). Societal and parental influences on adolescent
sexual
behavior. Psychological Reports,
75, 928.
Hersch,
P. (1998). A
tribe apart: A journey into the heart
of American adolescence. New York:
Ballantine Books.
Holmes, A. M. (1999). Hook-up U. National Review, 51, (17) 48.
Intrator, S.M. (2002). Stories of the courage to teach: Honoring the teachers heart. Jossey-Bass Publishers: New York.
Kelley, D. (Producer). (2000). Boston Public [Television series]. New York: FOX.
Kelley, D. (Producer). (2001). Boston Public [Television series]. New York: FOX.
Kelley, D. (Producer). 2002). Boston Public [Television series]. New York: FOX.
Kennedy, R. (2002). Nigger: The strange career of a troublesome word. New York: Pantheon Books.
Kirby, D. (2002). The impact of schools and school programs upon adolescent sexual behavior. Journal of Sex Research. 39, 27-34.
Lee, L. (2000). David E. Kelley Goes Back to School with 'Boston Public.' retrieved December 19, 2000, from Newspaper Source database.
Lickona,
T.
(1993, Nov). The return of
character education. Educational
Leadership, 51, 6-12.
Matias, K. P. (2001). The talk of the web. OnMagazine, 6, (10). 42-44.
Mendler, A. (2001) Connecting with students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
NASSP, 2002, Retrieved Feb. 28, 2002, http://www.principals.org/research/06-03.html
Ogawa, R. T. and S. T. Bossert. (2000). Leadership as an organizational quality, pp. 38-58. In The Jossey-Bass reader in educational leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Osterman, K. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70, 323-367.
Petronicolos, L. (1996). Tinker, Fraser, and Hazelwood: Which Educational Policies are Truly "Educational"? Retrieved November 9, 2001, from ERIC.
PTC Insider. (2001, January). Beware of the pubic school: Help us take action now.
3, 4.
Remez, L. (2002). Oral sex among adolescents: Is it sex or is it abstinence? Family Planning Perspectives, 32, 298-304.
Rosenberg, H. (2000, Oct 23). ‘Boston Public’ recalls high school-on Pluto. The Los Angeles Times, p F-1
Sacks, P. (2000). Predictable Losers in Testing Schemes. The School Administrator, 57, (11), 6-9.
Taylor, K. R. (2001). Boston Public: Reality TV? Principal Leadership, 1 (8) 61-65.
Troy, F. J. (2003). The myth of our failed educational system. In Noll, J.W. editor. Taking Sides: Clashing views on educational issues. McGraw Hill/Dushkin:
Wellstone, Senator P. (2001, January). A Senator Challenges the Tests. NEA Today, 19 (4), 10.
Who’s Who Among American High School Students. (1998). Attitudes and opinions from the nation’s high achieving teens: 29th annual survey of high achievers. Lake Forest, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED429671.)
Zirkel, P. A. (1999). A courtside interview: The 30th anniversary of Tinker. Phi Delta Kappan. 81 (1), 34-40.