This paper reports upon a study which examines the changing role and effectiveness of local education authorities. The study, which is being conducted in three phases (and to date has involved 17 local education authorities) draws on survey and interview data to explore the growing diversity between authorities; the degree of their effectiveness; their contribution to quality and school improvement; and the nature of their educational leadership. The analysis presented draws in particular upon survey findings from the 11 authorities involved in phases i and ii of the project.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ball, S.J.
, Vincent, C. and Radnor, H. (1997) ‘Into Confusion: LEAs, Accountability and Democracy’, Journal of Education Policy12(3): 147–163.
2.
Coleman, P.
and LaRoque, L. (1990) Struggling to be Good Enough: Administrative Practices andSchool District Ethos. London: Falmer Press.
3.
Coleman, P.
and Riley, K.A. (1995) ‘Accentuate the Positive’, Education(14 July): 11–18.
4.
Cordingley, P.
and Kogan, M. (1993) In Support of Education. London: Jessica Kingsley.
5.
DES
(1987) Report by HM Inspectorate on Education Provision in the Outer London Borough ofBrent. London: Department of Education and Science.
6.
DfEE
(1997) Excellence in Schools. London: HMSO.
7.
DfEE
(1998) Draft Code of Practice on LEA–School Relations. London: Department for Education and Employment.
8.
Elmore, R.E.
(1993) ‘The Role of Local School Districts in Instructional Improvement’, in S.H. Fuhrman (ed.) Designing Coherent Education Policy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9.
Hackett, G.
(1997) ‘Chief Inspector Seeks to Limit Role of Councils in Improving Schools’, TimesEducational Supplement: 5-5.
10.
Independent(1991) ‘A Schools’ Charter’ (5 June).
11.
Kirklees Local Authority
(1996) Review of Kirklees Education Authority(November).
12.
Lawson, N.
(1992) The View from Number 11. London: Corgi.
13.
Leithwood, K.
, Begley, P.T. and Cousins, J.B. (1994) Developing Expert Leadership for FutureSchools. London: Falmer Press.
14.
Louis, K.S.
, Kruse, S.D. and Associates (1995) Professionalism and Community. CA: Corwin Press.
15.
OECD
(1994) Quality in Teaching. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
16.
OFSTED
(1997) A Framework for the Inspection of Local Education Authorities. London: Office of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools in conjunction with The Audit Commission.
17.
Riley, K.A.
(1992) Education Indicators and the Search for Quality, pp. 1–33. Luton: Local Government Management Board.
18.
Riley, K.A.
(1994) Quality and Equality: Promoting Opportunities with Schools. London: Cassell.
19.
Riley, K.A.
(1997) ‘Changes in Local Governance—Collaboration Through Networks: A Post-16 Case Study’, Education Management & Administration25(2): 155–157.
20.
Riley, K.A.
(1998) Whose School is it Anyway?London: Falmer Press.
21.
Riley, K.A.
, Docking, J. and Rowles, D. (1998) ‘LEAs on Probation: Will They Make the Grade?’Education Review (Is the Sun Setting on LEAs?)12(1): 30–34. London: National Union of Teachers.
22.
Riley, K.A.
and Rowles, D. (1997a) ‘Managing with Governors’, in B. Fidler, S. Russell and T. Simkins (eds) Choices for Self-Managing Schools. London: BEMAS and Paul Chapman.
23.
Riley, K.A.
and Rowles, D. (1997b) From Intensive Care to Recovery: Schools Requiring SpecialMeasures. London: London Borough of Haringey.
24.
Riley, K.A.
and Rowles, D. (1997c) ‘Inspection and School Improvement in England and Wales: National Contexts and Local Realities’, in T. Townsend (ed.) Restructuring, Quality and Effectiveness: Problems and Possibilities for Tomorrow’s Schools, pp. 81–99. London: Routledge.
25.
School Standards and Framework Act (1998) London: HMSO.
26.
Staffordshire County Council
(1996) Review of Staffordshire Education Authority, led by Professor M. Kogan. Stafford: Staffordshire CC.
