Chalker, D.M. (Ed.) (1999) Leadership for Rural Schools: Lessons for all Educators. Reviewed by Dennis M. Mulcahy

Chalker, D.M. (Ed.) (1999) Leadership for Rural Schools: Lessons for all Educators. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing 308 pp. + xvi $64.95       ISBN 1-56676-695-8 (Cloth) Reviewed by Dennis M. Mulcahy Memorial University of Newfoundland May 23, 1999         As many rural education researchers have pointed out, small rural schools have been in and out of favor with both urban and rural education leaders and authorities (DeYoung, 1987,1991; Howley & Eckman,1997; Nachtigal, 1982; Sher, 1977). When one and two room community schools were the only forms of education in most places, they were valued, as Alan DeYoung notes in the Foreword to Leadership for Rural Schools, "as bastions of democracy and civic purpose" (xiii). By the end of the nineteenth century, the views of the emergent professional education leaders began to change, and the rural school came increasingly to be depicted as a problem--an impediment to educational progress and development. In fact, the history of rural education reform in the twentieth century actually chronicles a concerted effort to improve small rural schools out of existence (DeYoung & Howley, 1995; Mulcahy, 1996; 1999) by imposing on them a standardized and homogenized system of schooling based on urban models. City and state or provincial educational leaders spearheaded the assault on small schools and community-based education. Unfortunately, the relentless efforts to consolidate schools and make them more distant from children's homes were often supported, sometimes enthusiastically, by rural educators who had bought into the ideology underpinning the one best system: "bigger is better" (Tyack, 1974).         For most of this century few voices were heard extolling the virtues of small-scale schooling and community-based education. The struggle to maintain small community schools was left to the grass roots efforts of rural folks who often had little to draw on but their emotions and their strong belief in and commitment to their local schools. In response to their efforts to keep small rural schools alive, professional educators often accused rural citizens of being ignorant, standing in the way of progress, and not having the best interests of their children at heart.         Just when the rural school problem had almost been "solved" and the small rural community school was all but a distant memory in most places, education researchers and leaders discovered some unhappy truths: Bigger is not necessarily better, there is value in diversity, and many of the qualities characterizing rural community schools are worthy of emulation in all schools.         DeYoung succinctly summarizes this important sea change: The evidence now is that bigger schools are usually not better schools, that multi-age classrooms more frequent in rural schools can have important instructional advantages over graded schools, and that the sort of participation in extracurricular activities recognized as critical today for student success is more possible in smaller schools than in larger schools. We are also finding that equal educational opportunity is more about school and community connections and uniform curricular opportunities that have typically been the forte of rural, not urban, schools. (xiii-xiv)         These are exciting, if challenging, times to be involved in rural education research and development. There is an increasing body of research and scholarly work to draw on by those interested in enhancing the provision of education and schooling in rural communities. The work inspired and supported by the Annenberg Challenge under the directorship of Paul Nachtigal is making a major contribution to the field. The ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools continues to grow in value as an essential resource for rural educators and researchers. Leadership in Rural Schools is an excellent example of the quality work currently being produced under the general rubric of rural education studies. Edited by Donald Chalker, it is a collection of sixteen essays, which, with one exception, represent new work.         Leadership for Rural Schools provides a comprehensive overview of the major issues and concerns that affect rural education and schooling. For the newcomer, this book is an essential introduction to the field. For those more experienced and knowledgeable in rural education, this book shares some interesting new research and provides valuable new insights and informed perspectives.         "The idea for this book," states Chalker "developed from conversations" among colleagues at Western Carolina University, who shared a realization that: The need for rural research is vast, and the educational system needs to understand the value of rural education settings and the appropriateness of small schools. Bigger is no longer better (original emphasis). (p. 7) In the introductory chapter, Chalker identifies two intended audiences and purposes: First, to "help educational leaders who work in small schools or rural settings better understand their role" and second, to "help all educators learn elements of the rural model that can enhance every school" (p. 7). To achieve these goals, Chalker and his fellow contributors set out to explore and discuss some key questions about rural education: Can ruralness and smallness be defined? Are rural and/or small schools unique? Is the uniqueness of rural schools a positive condition? Do rural schools require leaders who understand rural uniqueness? Can research and a study of best practice in rural school leadership lead to knowledge that educational leaders can use to improve rural schools? (p. 7)         The sixteen chapters of the book are divided into four sections: "The Rural Setting," "Rural Leadership: The View from the Top," "Rural Site Based Leadership" and "Leadership and Organization Skills for Rural School Leaders." Essays in all four sections offer perspectives on one or more of the five questions identified above. In doing this review I will provide a quick overview of each section and attempt to give the reader some indication of the particular focus of each chapter. With so many selections, I cannot hope, in just a few comments about each, to do justice to the very fine body of individual work that has been assembled here by the editor. Be that as it may, I do hope to convince the reader that this is a book well worth a more thorough exploration.         Section One, " The Rural Setting," consists of three essays including an introduction by the editor. The purpose of this section, according to Chalker, "is to establish the parameters of rural education" (p. 7). The primary questions addressed examine the uniqueness of the rural context and the distinctive advantages as well as challenges that are associated with small scale schooling. I really appreciated Chalker's unique introduction to this scholarly book of readings: When I was about to enter a K-12 high school in a small Ohio village, my father came home one evening from the barber shop and handed me a four-year schedule that he declared would properly prepare me for college. While waiting his turn for a haircut at the village barbershop, he conversed with one of my teachers (also the school's only coach). Coach George developed a high school program for me and had his hair trimmed at the same time. So for the next four years, I took every course outlined, studied enough to earn presentable grades, played all three sports the school offered (coached, of course, by Coach George), delivered the commencement address and then, indeed, matriculated successfully to college. My parents, my teachers, and community members never really offered me another choice. I am thankful that I grew up in small town and attended a small school. Editing a book on rural school leadership is a rewarding way to celebrate my rural roots. (p. 5)         By beginning with the personal, Chalker not only establishes his rural roots, but also illustrates something of the style and content of the rural educational experience. His account of his personal and professional experiences contributes to the attempt to define rural education. Rural and small schools tend to be more personal and informal than larger urban schools; at the same time they cannot (nor should they try to) offer the menu of possibilities in curricular and co-curricular experiences of larger school. Chalker's memories of his small schools are mixed "some pleasant and some troubling;" nevertheless, he continues to believe that, "small schools in rural communities offer a path to excellence that eludes others" (p. 5). This excellence is achieved in part because of the "close cooperation between teacher and parent, a basic curriculum easily understood and goal directed, and a small town population that values its local school" (p. 5).         I don't suppose there is anyone who claims "rural education" as her or his special area of research interest who has not had to deal with questions such as, "What's so unique or different about rural schools that they deserve special interest or consideration?" Behind the question invariably are the beliefs that there is nothing unique about rural schools and that small schools are simply smaller versions of larger schools. Perhaps the most irritating question of all is, "Do we still have small schools? Haven't they all been closed?" As a university- based researcher I have to deal with these questions practically every time any rural initiative is introduced in Faculty meetings.         This state of affairs points to the value of chapters two and three of Leadership for Rural Schools. In their essay "The Nature of Rural Schools: Trends, Perceptions and Values," Mary Jean Herzog and Robert Pittman address the challenge of trying to establish the uniqueness of rural education and schooling. One persistent challenge, the authors point out, resides in the fact that the very concept of "rural" lacks a definitive meaning. The term is generally defined by default or from a deficit perspective, for example, "a rural community is a non-urban or non-metropolitan area with fewer than 2,500 inhabitants." The frame of reference is always urban, a circumstance, the authors suggest, that "seems to have contributed to a weak identity among our students: they often appear apologetic for being from the country"(p. 13). A second challenge is the fact that negative and demeaning images and connotations of "rural" are deeply ingrained in the language and the culture. As Toni Haas (1991) argues, modern American society does not value ruralness; prejudices against rural people and places are strong. Rural students seem to have internalized those prejudices, and they often seem to have an inferiority complex about their origins. (p. 14)         Herzog and Pittman also review demographic, economic and educational trends to point out how each of these contributes to making rural education uniquely challenging. Moreover, the authors note that the most significant educational trend of the century, school and district consolidation, has not lived up to its promise. Citing Stern (1994), they point out, "although consolidation has resulted in bigger districts and bigger schools, rural schools are still smaller and poorer than nonrural schools" (p. 18). At the heart of the problem are funding policies and allocation formulas that are tied to student numbers.         Fewer students mean less money and, Fewer dollars mean fewer teachers and fewer advanced or specialized courses, thus putting students in rural schools at a disadvantage, a situation not unlike the urban inequalities Kozol (1991) describes. (p. 18)         The challenges identified by Herzog and Pittman are formidable. In the second half of their essay they offer a perspective on the inherent strengths of rural communities, strengths on which educators can draw in order to address the challenges. As a way of determining the nature of such strengths the authors carried out an attitude survey with 108 education students attending Western Carolina University.         From their analysis of student responses, Herzog and Pittman came to the conclusion that the "positive feelings [students] had about living in rural areas were connected with their families, homes and small communities and with peace, safety, and caring"(p.22). Their students' "sense of community" and "smallness of scale" represent the best qualities of rural life.         In chapter three, "'It's Déjà vu All Over Again': The Rural School Problem Revisited," Penny Smith provides a detailed and comprehensive review of the criticisms that have been made of rural schooling since the nineteenth century. She notes, "the list of ways in which rural schools have failed their students [according to their critics] has remained remarkably unchanged over most of the of the last two centuries" (p. 27). The solution to "the rural school problem" has also remained unchanged: Close and consolidate smaller community schools so that rural schools can more nearly approximate larger urban schools. Smith's historical review of rural educational reform is both scholarly and accessible. She notes that the rural school problem was "discovered" in the late nineteenth century when educational reformers started to view "the rural components of their state school systems as defective and were arguing that one reason for those defects was the rural environment in which they operated"(p. 30).         Starting with the NEA 's Committee of Twelve on Rural Schools (1890) and the Report of the Country Life Commission (1911), Smith reviews a hundred years of critiques of and proposed solutions for rural education and schooling. In her review of most of the significant writing on rural education in the US--both government reports and the work of current rural education scholars--she provides the reader with a provocative capsule history of rural education. It is a remarkable achievement. I suggest that this essay alone makes the book a worthwhile acquisition for anyone interested or involved in rural education. Noting the limitations of such a classification scheme, Smith states that the various ideological perspectives on rural education reform, past and present, can be grouped for convenience into three non-exclusive groups, which she labels "neo- romantics, romantic traditionalists, and political traditionalists." She notes that all three groups more or less agree on the challenges associated with rural schools. There is less agreement, however, when it comes to solutions. Traditionalists of both the romantic and political stripe, Smith contends, continue to "advocate universal remedies, use the language of industry, and are inclined to think about schools as a global activity. Place is something one might acknowledge, but is not as significant a variable as other factors in determining what and how to teach"(p. 44).         Neo-romantics, says Smith, (She groups here Jonathan Sher, Paul Nachtigal, Alan DeYoung, Craig and Aimee Howley, and Paul Theobald.), affirm in their writings many of the practices that have long been associated with rural education: Lower class sizes, smaller schools, the establishment of a sense of community, service education, multi-age groupings, cooperative learning, interdisciplinary projects, paired teacher-student advancement, integration of the community into the program of study, and an emphasis on returning the personal to what has become in large schools an impersonal enterprise. (p. 44)         Smith notes that none of the ideological or practical questions regarding rural purposes or solutions has been resolved. She concludes that not much progress has been made despite 100 years of debate. Education remains in the grip of the one-size-fits-all approach. "The romantics notwithstanding, generic has come to mean what we do in suburban and, sometimes in urban schools; it is [rural] education with a city face"(p. 45).         Smith concludes her essay with what she believes rural administrators might learn from the history of struggle for rural schooling. She maintains that rural leaders must recognize that there is no "monolithic place called 'Rural'" and that they must be "trained to think within a particular rural context" (p. 55). Most important, they must find the "courage" to act within the context--action that may be quite challenging given the current "era of national standard-setting and standardized test accountability systems geared to an urban school model and urban, industrial and largely impersonal economic aspirations"(p. 55).         Section Two, "Rural Leadership the View from the Top," examines rural school leadership at the district level. In Chapter Four, "The Rural School Board," Marilyn Grady and Bernita Krumm focus on the leadership task of building positive working relationships with rural school boards. Reviewing the research of Grady and Bryant (1990), the authors note that superintendents tend to identify board members' families and friends and board members' roles as the two most frequent sources of "critical incidents" between superintendents and boards. From the point of view of the school board presidents, the greatest sources of conflict involved communications and human relations issues and incidents.         Citing the research of Ferre and associates (1988) and Kennedy and Barker (1986) the authors identify, not surprisingly, financial and funding issues as the most critical issues faced by those responsible for running small rural school districts. Other issues include "improving school curriculum, regional economic conditions, state regulations, and providing an adequate variety of classes" (p.69). Given the centrality and significance of school consolidation as indicated in Section One of the text, it is surprising that according to Grady and Krumm, "School consolidation did not appear to be a major issue"(p. 69).         In Chapter Five, Ed Chance focuses on "The Rural Superintendent," exploring why some succeed while others fail. Chance reminds us that the superintendent's job in both rural and urban settings is highly "complex and full of conflict, politics and community input" (p.83). The major difference between the two contexts, however, is that the rural superintendent "may also be teacher, counselor, building principal, bus driver, and the total central office staff. The typical rural superintendent wears many hats and answers to a multitude of constituents on a daily basis"(p. 83).         According to Chance, researchers (e.g., Chance & Capps, 1992; Grady & Bryant 1991) identify communication problems as the number one reason why superintendents fail in their jobs and are dismissed. "Open, unfettered, honest communication between superintendent and the board, community, and staff represent a key issue in the success or failure of superintendents" (p. 85). The second most common reason for superintendents to be fired is financial mismanagement. Chance notes, "financial mismanagement really means financial incompetence"(p. 85).         The successful rural superintendent, Chance states, must be a competent manager and conserver of limited school and community resources while being an excellent human relations expert. He must focus on students and their well being, while also taking into consideration the larger, politically charged venue of the rural community and rural school district. ( p.93) Chance identifies as essential characteristics "wisdom, courage, common sense and a willingness to learn throughout his/her career"(p.93).         In chapter six, "Personal and Human Resources Functions in the Rural School District: Some Insights and Directions," Robert Morris and Les Potter argue that what is needed in rural schools is, "a fresh perspective on democratic leadership that maximizes the strengths and minimizes the weaknesses of rural and small town schools"(p. 95). Morris and Potter begin by making the important point that "one of the considerable shortcomings of traditional study of administrative leadership in schools is that it is decontextualized and, by default, aimed primarily at middle-class white America" (p. 98). More and more, we can realize that administrative leadership in suburbia or the inner city is not an appropriate model for educational leadership in small and rural communities, where the school is an intimate part of the community. In small towns the superintendents and principals are public leaders [and can] contribute not only to educational enhancement but also to community enhancement as well. They have much more potential power for community change and leadership than do their urban counterparts. (p. 98)         Morris and Potter spend the rest of the chapter making the case that a democratic leadership style would enhance the rural administrator's ability to create a collaborative structure that would "evolve initiatives for revitalizing the educational, economic, and social life of rural and small-town America" (p.99). The authors criticize the internal governance of most rural and small-town schools as following "outmoded administrative theory" and being "frequently authoritarian and traditional, pitting teachers and administrators against one another" (p. 108).         In Chapter 7, Richard Haynes focuses on school improvement and instructional outcomes. He states that the underlying assumption for the ideas presented in the chapter is that the "principal is the central level for instructional improvement at the local level; therefore the focus for new ideas and practices needs to center on the principal"(p. 111). Haynes provides a competent overview of many generic school improvement ideas and practices. As he states in his conclusion, "school improvement takes time, teamwork and clear communication"(p. 133). What he does not address adequately, however, are the contextual issues and concerns that were discussed in the first section of the book. Particularly in rural districts, but in other districts as well, local needs and priorities must become the major considerations that guide school improvement initiatives.         The third section of the text consists of three essays on the theme, "Rural Site Based Leadership." The first of these, written by J. Casey Hurley, aims to "illustrate how rural schools that build on their strengths become fertile environments for children" (p. 140). According to Hurley, the key to success for rural schools is to identify and build on the intrinsic strengths of small-scale schooling and the unique characteristics of rural places. In this chapter Hurley reports on his research with fourteen rural school leaders in twelve states.         He presents the research findings in a series of anecdotal narratives, which are entertaining and at the same time illustrative of how the rural education context functions and how effective rural leaders respond to that context. More powerful and evocative than any set of statistics, the stories provide rich vignettes that go a long way towards defining the rural experience. This research reminds us that, to become aware of the strengths of a rural community, we need to become part of that community on its terms.         In "Southern Schools, Southern Teachers: Redefining Leadership in Rural Communities," Eleanor Blair Hilty takes as her focus "attempts to define the roles and responsibilities of teachers working in leadership roles in southern schools"(p. 157). The prevalence of rural poverty and notions about the deficits inherent in rural communities in the South, she states, provide a necessary context for her discussion.         Hilty makes the point that the rhetoric of educational reform over the last decade is fundamentally flawed in both its critique and suggested generic solutions because it has ignored "important differences that set apart schools in urban, suburban, and rural school districts"(p. 157). Further, she says, attempts to "re- form or restructure have often lacked an ideology that informs or shapes the direction of these efforts"(p. 160). Decidedly absent have been individuals "guided by a set of beliefs that reflect a commitment to equity and excellence"(p. 160).         What kinds of teachers do we need in schools situated in communities with high levels of poverty and low levels of educational attainment? How do we prepare such teachers to take effective leadership roles in these contexts? Hilty offers this perspective as a beginning: It is important for rural teachers to begin to articulate those social and cultural phenomena that impact their schools and classrooms, and for us as educators to begin to train teachers to be leaders in rural schools--to empower teachers, students, and parents to articulate a vision of culturally relevant pedagogy that recognizes the unique social and cultural identities of southern school and communities. (p.169)         In Hilty's view, given the unique socio-economic circumstances of rural southern schools, teachers have to be prepared to "teach against the grain." Among other things, teaching against the grain means being prepared to "alter curricula, raise questions about common [and taken- for-granted] practices, and resist inappropriate decisions"(p. 168). For the author, "it seems intuitively obvious that teachers acting as leaders must begin to 'lead against the grain' in schools where poverty and school failure are pervasive, and the aims and purposes of the schools are not congruent with those of the community"(p.168). Hilty is right, but, unfortunately, what is intuitively obvious to her continues to be obscured or overlooked in most teacher education programs, urban or rural. Conceptualizing the teacher as an intellectual agent of social change and empowerment is far removed from the curricula of most faculties of education.         "Students Are People, Too" by Anna Hicks is the final selection in Section Three. The author presents a "rationale for the active involvement of students in rural school leadership" (p. 173). Hicks suggests that the voice of students is often not heard in educational reform efforts. According to Hicks, adults should listen to and make room for "the fresh, insightful voices of students" (p. 173).         The author devotes most of this chapter to an overview of exemplary curricular and extra-curricular programs that illustrate student-centered democratic principles in action. Each of these programs and learning experiences occurred because the adults were prepared to trust and believe in their students' capabilities and sense of responsibility. In each of these examples the students, both high school and elementary, rose to the occasion.         The final section of Leadership for Rural Schools consists of six chapters under the general heading, "Leadership and Organizational Skills for Rural School Leaders." In "Rural Education: Leadership and Technology," Robert Houghton sets out to answer a number of important questions including: What conceptual and technical knowledge must educational leaders have to make proper strategic and tactical decisions for the information age? And what potential does the information-age have for innovation and transformation in the rural school system? Houghton rightly cautions rural educators against simply seeing the pressure "to wire up" rural schools as another urban innovation being imposed on rural communities. Computer technology and the use of the internet for educational purposes do not constitute a fad that in time will fade away. Increasingly, our schools, as well as our society as a whole, will be totally enveloped in a telecommunications web. We can choose to let it happen to us or we can take an active role in controlling and shaping our own electronic futures. Choices and decisions can be made so that "rural purposes" (Howley & Barker, 1997) are served, because, as Houghton points out, "[u]rban and rural solutions may not always be the same amidst a rich array of [telecommunications] alternatives (p. 196). One body of knowledge--critical literature on technology and education--that Houghton does not address in his article should nevertheless be construed as essential reading for rural school administrators. Decisions about telecommunications do not just concern technical specifications and long distance charges. They also concern fundamental educational decisions that have profound philosophical and intellectual implications.         Chapter 12, "Nobody is as Smart as All of Us: Collaboration in Rural Schools," by William Clauss is an "invitation to the reader to reexamine the potential power of the collaborative process" (p.12). Collaboration is also the theme of chapter thirteen, in which Ed Chance shares two case studies of rural districts engaged in the process of collaborative vision building. "Rural schools and rural communities," according to Chance, "exist in a unique symbiotic relationship"(p. 231). Together the school and the community constitute "a greater community," one that "epitomizes people who share a common core of values regarding the young people of that community and their future" (p. 231). This greater community is united not just on the basis of geography but also on the basis of a "shared sense of belonging, caring and community focus"(p. 231). Of course, not all rural schools and communities have this kind of relationship. As Chance points out, schools and communities often do not realize their important bond until the existence of one or the other is threatened by external forces, and, unfortunately, "it may simply be impossible to develop a collaborative interdependence at that stage of the game"(p. 233).         The editor of the book, Don Chalker returns in Chapter 14 to offer a discussion of "Politics and Decision-Making: The Rural Scene." "Rural school leaders," states Chalker, "must understand the infusion or, as the case may be, the intrusion of politics into the educational decisions"(p. 243). In this chapter Chalker explores the nature of the political climate of small and rural districts and provides some suggestions about how to survive, cope, and even succeed within such a charged context.         Decision-making in all school districts, urban and rural, is politically based, at least to some degree. Rural school politics, according to Chalker, are unique for at least three reasons: First, rural areas and small towns have constituencies that are probably more open and more knowledgeable about local politics than their more cosmopolitan neighbors in suburban or urban America. Second, rural politics operate from a smaller population base where almost every political player is known in the community. And, third, rural politics focus more on local issues than state or national issues. (p. 245) These differences, claims Chalker, are important enough to require a different approach by rural leaders. He argues that the fundamental political problem faced by rural school administrators is the "tension between the community's need for school leadership that can lead and be trusted, and the same community's desire to have its own will carried out by that leadership" (p. 248).         Chalker also identifies the consolidation movement and changes in school funding as the two key state initiatives that have had "tremendous effect on rural education"(p. 252). Chalker refers to the work of Sher (1986) and Monk and Haller (1990) as examples of research that can be used to counter the arguments used by state-level decision- makers to justify closing community schools. In Chalker's view: Rural school leaders must stand strong against consolidation movements for they are political rather than educational. At the same time, rural school leaders must extol the virtues of their smallness and ruralness. (p. 253)         In Chapter 15, "Assessing School District Quality: Contrasting State and Citizens' Perspectives," Emile Haller, Janie Nusser, and David Monk focus on the increasing pressure placed on schools to be accountable for educational outcomes. The authors raise an essential question: Is there agreement between parents and state bureaucrats regarding the criteria used and the actual judgments made about public schools? To answer the question Haller and associates report on their research conducted in New York State.         Findings from Haller and associates' study reveal that "existing state measures do no persuasively demonstrate to ordinary citizens that a problem exists in their schools"(p. 263). According to the authors, their most significant finding, "has been that residents' judgements of the merit of their schools bear only tangential relationships to the assessments made by the SED" (p. 279). The authors take this finding to be vitally important because, in their view, a successful reform effort, depends in no small part on the assumptions that the publication of data illustrating schools' performance on various measures will prompt citizens to exert pressure on school officials in deficient districts. If citizens and state officials do no agree on which criteria best capture school quality or on the summative judgement derived from those criteria, then there is little reason to expect that they will conclude that their own assessments are inferior to those of the state.(p.279)         The final selection in the book is "Curriculum Needs for a Rural Native American Community" by Doris Hipps. I am pleased that the editor included at least one chapter on this topic. The overwhelming majority of aboriginal schools in North America are situated in rural communities and should be included in any study of rural education. As several researchers have pointed out, diversity is a highly significant characteristic of rural places, so much so that using the term "rural" as a general descriptor lacks precise meaning. Hipps' article reminds us that ethnic and aboriginal (Indian and Inuit) groups are important and unique contributors to the diversity of rural places. The author maintains that educational leaders must make take into account the cultural identity and the unique belief systems and learning styles of native peoples. Conclusion         Leadership for Rural Schools makes an important contribution to rural education studies. A major strength of the book lies in the fact that most of the ideas and perspectives presented have emerged from grounded experiences in rural contexts. The various authors have obviously "been there, done that," and are well able to use their experiences to derive insights and suggestions that have wide currency for others working in rural places. Their voices are authentic, their observations keen, and their conclusions both affirmative and provocative. A notable theme running through the book concerns the need for educational leaders to be courageous. Smith (Chapter Three) and Chance (Chapter Five) speak of courage directly, whereas others, such as Hilty (Chaper Nine) and Chalker (Chapter Fourteen), make implicit references. Hilty speaks of "teaching and leading against the grain" and Chalker of the need for rural leaders to take a "strong stand against political decisions" that have no educational foundation to support them.         Funk and Wagnalls' (1987) dictionary defines courage as "that quality of mind or spirit enabling one to meet danger or opposition with fearlessness, calmness and firmness"(p. 309). Moreover, the phrase "the courage of one's convictions" means having the courage "to act in accordance with what one feels to be right"(p. 309). Books such as Leadership for Rural Schools provide considerable knowledge and persuasive arguments that can be used by educational leaders in their struggles to improve the quality of education in rural places. The evidence is readily available that enables rural leaders to rebuff the conventional arguments that have been used to justify the urbanization of rural schooling. Alternative models-- responsive to the rural context--are emerging. But where will the rural leaders find the courage they need in order to act on the basis of this knowledge? And for those of us responsible for educating the next generation of leaders, how might we teach courage? By example? References Chance, E.W., & Capps, J.L. (1992). Superintendent stability in schools. National Forum on Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 9(2), 23-32. DeYoung, A.J. (1987). The status of American rural education research: An integrated review and commentary. Review of Educational Research, 57(2), 123-148. DeYoung, A.J. (1990). The political economy of rural school consolidation. Peabody Journal of Education, 67(4), 63-89. De Young, A.J. (1991). Rural education, issues and practice. New York: Garland. Ferre, V.A. et al. (1988). Rural superintendents view their role: Ranking the issues. Research in Rural Education, 5(1), 33-34. Funk & Wagnalls Canadian College Dictionary. (1986). Toronto: Fitzhenry & Whiteside. Grady, M.L., & Bryant, M.T. (1990). Critical incidents between superintendents and school boards: Implications for practice. Planning and Changing, 20(4), 206-214. Grady, M.L., & Bryant, M.T. (1991), School board turmoil and superintendent turnover: What pushes them to the brink? School Administrator, 48(2), 19-26. Haas, T. (1991). Why reform doesn't apply. In A.J. DeYoung (Ed.), Rural education, issues and practice (pp. 412-446). New York: Garland. Howley, C.B., & Barker, B. (1987). The national information infrastructure: Keeping rural values and purposes in mind. ERIC? Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools Eric Digest: EDO-RC-97-4 Howley, C.B., & Eckman, J.M. (1997). Sustainable small schools. Charleston, WV: Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. Kennedy, R., & Barker, B.O. (1986, October). Rural school superintendents: A national study of perspectives of school board presidents. Presentation at the annual conference of the Rural Education Association, Little Rock, AR. (ERIC Document Service Reproduction No. ED 274 497) Kozol, J.(1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America's schools (First ed.). New York, NY: Crown Publishers. Monk, D. H., & Haller, E.J. (1990). Keeping an eye on the reformers: State education bureaucrats and the future of small rural schools. In A.B. Bacharach, (Ed.), Education reform: Making sense of it all. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Mulcahy, D. (1996, October). Reforming small schools out of existence: A Canadian example. Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Rural Education Association, San Antonio, TX. Mulcahy, D.M. (1999) Conflicting views on rural education reform. Morning Watch 27(1). Nachtigal, P. (Ed.). (1982). Rural education in search of a better way. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Sher, J.P. (Ed.). (1977). Education in rural America: A reassessment of conventional wisdom. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Sher, J.P. (1986) Heavy meddle. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina School Board Association. Stern, J. D. (Ed.) (1994). The condition of education in rural schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Tyack, D.B. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. About the Reviewer Dennis Mulchay Dennis Mulcahy is an associate professor in the Faculty of Education, Memorial University, Canada. He has a PhD in Curriculum Studies from the University of Toronto. His interests in rural education are eclectic and include: one-room schools, multiage pedagogy, and distance education. Since 1992 he has closely monitored the process of rural educational reform in his home province of Newfoundland and Labrador and has been actively involved in helping rural communities resist the closure of their small schools. He presents regularly at NREA conferences and is the editor of The Small Schools Newsletter.