{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028297779712668697, 'fraction_numerical': 0.023073574227252938, 'mean_word_length': 5.473239436619719, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Taking the Challenge: Factors Related to a District's Decision to Implement Reform

in California school districts, which influenced their decision to submit a letter of intent to become a Challenge District. Several conditions were present that influenced districts’ decisions to submit a letter of intent to become a Challenge District, such as compatibility with existing needs, compatibility with existing practices, payoff for participation due to benefits matching what districts wanted to address, top administrators’ readiness for change, and belief that the district could be successful. A Nation At-Risk (National Commission of Excellence in Education, 1983) warned that educational reform was needed to address mediocre student achievement. The authors urged readers to demand higher academic standards and a common curriculum. This report was followed by similar reports that echoed the need for reform, such as the Carnegie Forum’s A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the 21st Century (1986) and the National Governors’ Association’s A Time for Results (1986). The response to the call for reform came mainly from states (Firestone, 1989). Most states enacted legislation aimed at enhancing the quality of education in public schools. These “first-wave” reforms focused on standards such as stricter graduation course requirements and minimum competency tests for students and teachers (Rebarber, 1992). Between 1983 and 1985, according to Futrell (1990), state public policymakers passed more than 700 statutes stipulating what should be taught and when, how, and by whom it should be taught. California was one of the states to implement the first-wave reforms during the early to mid-1980s. In 1983, the California legislature passed the Hughes-Hart Reform Act, which instituted higher graduation standards, reoriented curriculum frameworks, lengthened the school day and year, established mentor teacher programs, revised the textbook selection process, and adopted stronger accountability systems. By 1986, there was little evidence that the state mandates of the early to mid-1980s had produced the desired gain in student achievement. The call for reform continued as five national reports condemned the inefficiency of state-mandated reform efforts. The Holmes Group, the Carnegie