the 1990s as two of the worst schools in Chicago in terms of math and reading achievement. Only two miles apart, the schools are in bordering neighborhoods and appear similar in many ways. Both enrolled nearly 100% minority students from families considered low income.During the 1990s, both launched an array of initiatives aimed at boosting student achievement. Hancock moved impressively forward, while Alexander barely moved the needle on improvement. How did Hancock "beat the odds" while Alexander failed to do so?This puzzle led us to undertake a systematic longitudinal investigation of hundreds of elementary schools in Chicago, just like Alexander and Hancock. Beginning in 1990, the Consortium on Chicago School Research initiated an intensive longitudinal study of the internal workings and external community conditions that distinguished improving elementary schools from those that failed to improve. That unique 15-year Organizing Schools for ImprovementResearch on Chicago school improvement indicates that improving elementary schools requires coherent, orchestrated action across five essential supports.

We present the concept of instructional program coherence and explain why school improvement frameworks that incorporate instructional program coherence are more likely to advance student achievement than multiple, unrelated efforts. We present evidence that Chicago elementary schools with stronger instructional program coherence make higher gains in student achievement. We also share observations on how, in specific schools, principals and external partners directed key school resources toward the development of instructional program coherence. In closing, we discuss factors within the educational system that discourage instructional program coherence and suggest ways that school leaders, school improvement partners, and policymakers can support greater instructional program coherence.

Purpose: This study examines the influence of principal leadership in high schools on classroom instruction and student achievement through key organizational factors, including professional capacity, parent–community ties, and the school’s learning climate. It identifies paths through which leadership explains differences in achievement and instruction between schools and differences in instruction among teachers within the same school. Research Design: Multilevel structural equation modeling was used to examine the relationships among principal leadership, school organizational structures, classroom instruction, and student grades and test gains on ACT’s Education Planning and Assessment System. Measures of principal leadership and school organizational structures were collected from teacher surveys administered to all high school teachers in Chicago Public Schools in the 2006–2007 school years. Findings: Within schools, variation in classroom instruction is associated with principal leadership through multiple pathways, the strongest of which is the quality of professional development and coherence of programs. Between schools, differences in instruction and student achievement are associated with principal leadership only via the learning climate. This suggests that in high schools, establishing a safe, college-focused climate may be the most important leadership function for promoting achievement schoolwide.

There is a national movement to universalize the high school curriculum so that all students graduate prepared for college. The present work evaluates a policy in Chicago that ended remedial classes and mandated college preparatory course work for all students. Based on an interrupted time-series cohort design with multiple comparisons, this study found that the policy reduced inequities in ninth grade course work by entering ability, race/ethnicity, and special education status. Although more students completed ninth grade with credits in algebra and English I, failure rates increased, grades slightly declined, test scores did not improve, and students were no more likely to enter college. In sum, few benefits resulted from universalizing college preparatory course work among freshmen, but dropout rates did not increase. Possible explanations are discussed.

School principals can play an important role in promoting teacher leadership by delegating authority and empowering teachers in ways that allow them influence in key organizational decisions and processes. However, it is unclear whether instruction and student learning are enhanced by promoting teacher influence in all aspects of school organization or whether it is better for principals to directly work on certain processes while delegating influence on others. We compare pathways from principal leadership through school organizational processes to student outcomes that include teacher influence as a mediating factor to pathways that do not include teachers' influence. Our results suggest that effective principals use teacher leadership to improve the school learning climate while they work directly on professional development and school program coherence. How do systems of leadership involving principals, teachers, and other school personnel function to improve school processes and student learning? Despite more than 4 decades of school leadership research, our understanding of how leadership systems connect to teaching and learning is far from complete