Editors' Introduction
Sam Stringfield and John Hollifield

Our communications features this issue address major Title I concerns: the coming shortage of teachers, and the shift to schoolwide reform measures. Mary Jean LeTendre examines how Title I and other funds can help address the coming shortage of teachers by supporting the establishment of career ladders for paraprofessionals, and she provides examples of current projects being carried out by state and local agencies. Virginia Plunkett examines how the movement from piecemeal categorical funding to schoolwide reform generates the need to restructure not only the use of funds, but also the use of human resources, in order to serve all students in a school.

Dianne L. Taylor, Charles Teddlie, John Freeman, and Mickey Pounders take us through a case study that looks for differences between low- and middle-SES schools that have been designated as more effective or less effective. Based on shadowing a typical third-grade student for a full-school-day through each of four schools, plus other qualitative information, they found that students in the low-SES more effective school were given opportunities to think critically, experienced a smoothly flowing day, and were exposed to active teaching. But in the other three schools (the mid-SES more effective and less effective schools, and the low-SES less effective school), they found students confronted with "a plethora of worksheet and textbook activities" and a fragmented day. The good news here, the researchers note, is that they found evidence that a low-SES school can be successful with its students; the bad news is that they found evidence that in the schools in their study, including in their mid-SES more effective school, children spend their time in mundane ways.

Two research studies in this issue address effective programs — the first examines how to build and evaluate a whole-school approach to early literacy, the second identifies programs that are effective for preventing dropout and promoting college attendance for students placed at risk.

Carmel A. Crévola and Peter W. Hill describe the Early Literacy Research Project (ELRP) being conducted in 27 schools in Australia to develop and implement a whole-school approach to prevention and intervention based on design elements similar to those used in the Success for All program, illustrating how the concepts and principles behind one successful program can be built upon in the creation of new programs. Results from the first full year of implementation show some initial effects on student literacy and indicate areas needing further attention in the next two years of the implementation and data analysis.

Olatokunbo S. Fashola and Robert E. Slavin follow up a previous JESPAR article on effective programs in elementary and middle schools (Volume 2, Number 3) with a best-evidence synthesis on effective dropout prevention and college attendance programs for students placed at risk. Again, their criteria for adequacy of evaluation methods and for replicability are tough, but they find some successful programs and are able to derive some general principles from their commonalities.

Book reviews for this issue continue the focus on evaluating and improving programs for students placed at risk. Geoffrey D. Borman’s review of Ford’s Reversing Achievement among Gifted Black Students: Promising Practices and Programs points out that the author delves into a neglected area and incorporates recommendations for improving gifted programs for minority students throughout her book. Shirley M Hord, examining Muncey and McQuillan’s Reform & Resistance in Schools and Classrooms: View of the Coalition of Essential Schools, finds this qualitative examination of eight schools implementing the Coalition of Essential Schools principles to be a "remarkable report," and describes its relevance for researchers, policy makers, and practitioners. John A. Nunnery applauds Ellis and Fouts, authors of Research on Educational Innovations, for their insistence on weighing the evidence for various innovations, applying a healthy skepticism, and then calling it like they see it. At the same time, Nunnery finds that Ellis and Fouts are able to fairly convey the complex and divergent issues that surround the development and use of many educational innovations. Finally, Anne C. Troutman and Richard E. Laitenen, reviewing Pugach and Warger’s Curriculum Trends, Special Education, and Reform: Refocusing the Conversation, note that the book’s two emphases are right on target -- special educators and regular educators must interact and collaborate, and they must engage in meaningful dialogue with administrators and teacher training professionals to ensure that all students can succeed.