Evidence that our program has helped students on standardized tests?
This has been very difficult to address. Several of our districts have used test scores and all show improved scores over time. But then the same is true for virtually all districts in the state. The most promising studies have been longitudinal, showing increasing improvement as students have experienced inquiry-centered learning over time. The difficulty is that we have no real control group to compare with. We don't know what these scores would look like under a typical text book program. Furthermore in attempting to design a valid study with proper controls and effective sampling to cover the entire demographic space of our project, while still maintaining student confidentiality, we have encountered huge logistical difficulties in terms of working through records essentially by hand. So at this time I cannot provide a definitive answer. I can say that the program does not appear to have negative consequences for test scores. So what may be missed by the rote memory of traditional approaches is at least compensated by improved process skills.

Funding?
The most promising aspect in this regard has been the willingness of partner district superintendents to support professional development from district funds at the level of 6-10 hours per year per teacher. This commitment will be put to the test this year as Alabama is in a 'proration' situation. This means that the legistlature passed budget based on projected income which has not materialized. Since, by law the government cannot go into debt, that part of the budget which is over the new income projections must be taken back. This has districts scrambling to see where their budgets can be cut back. Since the bulk of most budgets is for salaries, this leaves few places to cut and so our program is vulnerable.