Over the last four decades, state governments have become increasingly, and at times aggressively, involved in efforts to influence the public schools. This article describes that governance shift, examines contrasting views of its impact on local schools, and suggests that states may be influencing local schools in potentially powerful ways that have not been broadly recognized. This article underscores the importance of research that maps how state policies operate to affect both governance relationships and reform outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Astuto, T.A., & Clark, D. L. (1986). The effects of federal education policy changes on policy and program development in state agencies and local education agencies. Bloomington, IN: Policy Studies Center.
2.
Beadie, N. (2000). The limits of standardization and the importance of constituencies: Historical tensions in the relationship between state authority and local control. In N. D. Theobald & B. Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 47-91). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
3.
Boyd, W. L., & Kerchner, C. T. (1988). Introduction and overview: Education and the politics of excellence and choice. In W. L. Boyd & C. T. Kerchner (Eds.), The politics of excellence and choice in education (pp. 1-11). Philadelphia: Falmer.
4.
Burlingame, M. (1987). The shambles of local politics. PEA Bulletin, 13, 3-8.
5.
Burlingame, M. (1988). The politics of education and educational policy: The local level. In N. Boyan (Ed.), The handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 439-450). New York: Longman.
6.
Campbell, R. F., Cunningham, L., Nystrand, R., & Usdan, M. (1990). The organization and control of American schools (6th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
7.
Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 347-353.
8.
Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. Review of Research in Education, 18, 3-49.
9.
Corbett, H. D., & Wilson, B. (1991). Testing, reform and rebellion. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
10.
Cuban, L. (1984). School reform by remote control: SB 813 in California. Phi Delta Kappan, 66, 213-215.
11.
Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1980 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
12.
Danielson, M. N., & Hochschild, J. (1998). Changing urban education: Lessons, cautions, prospects. In C. N. Stone (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 277-295). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
13.
Danzberger, J. P., Carol, L. N., Cunningham, L. L., Kirst, M. W., McCloud, B. A., & Usdan, M. D. (1987). School boards: The forgotten player on the education team. Phi Delta Kappan, 69, 53-39.
14.
Delfattore, J. (1992). What Johnny shouldn't read: Textbook censorship in America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15.
Elmore, R. (1980). Complexity and control: What legislators can do about implementing public policy. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
16.
Elmore, R., & Sykes, G. (1992). Curriculum policy. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 85-215). New York: MacMillan.
17.
Fairman, J. C., & Firestone, W. F. (2001). The district role in state assessment policy: An exploratory study. In S. F. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 124-147). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
18.
Finkelstein, B., Malen, B., Muncey, D., Rice, J. K., & Croninger, R., with L. Briggset al. (2000). Caught in contradictions: The first two years of a reconstitution initiative (research monograph). College Park: University of Maryland, Department of Education Policy and Leadership.
19.
Firestone, W. A., Bader, B. D., Massel, D., & Rosenblum, S. (1992). Recent trends in state educational reform: Assessment and prospects. Teachers College Record, 94(2), 254-277.
20.
Firestone, W. A., Fitz, J., & Broadfoot, P. (1999). Power, learning and legitimation: Assessment implementation across levels in the United States and the United Kingdom. American Educational Research Journal, 36(4), 759-793.
21.
Firestone, W. A., Fuhrman, S., & Kirst, M. W. (1991). State education reform since 1983: Appraisal and the future. Educational Policy, 5(3), 233-250.
22.
Firestone, W. A., Mayrowetz, D., & Fairman, J. (1998). Performance-based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(2), 95-113.
23.
Fischer, F. (1990). Technocracy and the politics of expertise. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24.
Fowler, F. C. (2000). Converging forces: Understanding the growth of state authority over education. In N. D. Theobald & B. Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 123-146). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
25.
Fuhrman, S. H. (Ed.). (1993). Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26.
Fuhrman, S. H. (2001). Introduction. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 1-12). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
27.
Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1990). Understanding local control in the wake of state education reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(1), 82-96.
28.
Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1995). Ruling out rules: The evolution of deregulation in state education policy. Teachers College Record, 97(2), 279-309.
29.
Handler, J. F. (1998). Chicago school reform: Enablement or empowerment? The Good Society, 8(2), 9-14.
30.
Hertert, L. (1996). Systemic school reform in the 1990s: A local perspective. Educational Policy, 10(3), 379-398.
31.
Hess, F. M. (1999). Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
32.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.
33.
James, T. J. (1991). State authority and the politics of educational change. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 17, 169-224. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
34.
Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
35.
Kirst, M. W. (1988). Recent state education reform in the United States: Looking backward and forward. Educational Administration Quarterly, 24(3), 319-328.
36.
Ladd, H. (1996). Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
37.
Leithwood, K., & Menzies, T. (1998). Forms and effects of school-based management: A review. Educational Policy, 12(3), 325-346.
38.
Madaus, G. F., & O'Dwyer, L. M. (1999). A short history of performance assessment: Lessons learned. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(16), 249-267.
39.
Malen, B. (1994). The micropolitics of education: Mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school polities. In J. D. Scribner & D. H. Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 147-167). New York: Falmer.
40.
Malen, B. (2000, April). Reconstitution as promise and punishment: A micropolitical perspective. In R. Croninger (Chair), The impact of school reconstitution on local capacity for reform: A multidisciplinary examination of a high-stakes accountability reform strategy. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
41.
Malen, B., Croninger, R. C., Redmond Jones, D., & Muncey, D. (1999, October). Uncovering the potential contradictions in reconstitution reforms. Paper presented at the annual conference of the University Council for Educational Administration, Minneapolis.
42.
Malen, B., & Hart, A. W. (1987, April). Shaping career ladder reform: The influence of teachers on the policymaking process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
43.
Malen, B., & Muncey, D. (2000). Creating “a new set of givens”? The impact of state activism on site autonomy. In N. D. Theobald & B. Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 199-244). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
44.
Malen, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Kranz, J. (1990). What do we know about school-based management? A case study of the literature—a call for research. In W. H. Clune & J. F. Witte (Eds.), Choice and control in American education: Vol. 2. The practice of choice, decentralization and school restructuring (pp. 289-342). New York: Falmer.
45.
Malen, B., Theobald, N. D., & Bardzell, J. (2000). Achieving a “just balance” between local control of schools and state responsibility for K-12 education: Summary observations and research agendas. In N. D. Theobald & B. Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 313-332). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
46.
Mazzoni, T. L. (2000). State politics and school reform: The first decade of the “education excellence” movement. In N. D. Theobald & B. Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 147-196). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
47.
McClellan, M. C. (1989). An interview with George Madaus: New ways of thinking about testing. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(8), 642-645.
48.
McDermott, K. A. (1999). Controlling public education: Localism versus equity. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
49.
McDonnell, L., & Fuhrman, S. (1986). The political context of reform. In V. D. Mueller & M. P. McKeown (Eds.), The fiscal, legal and political aspects of state reform of elementary and secondary education (pp. 43-64). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
50.
McLaughlin, M. W. (1987). Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 171-178.
51.
McMillan, J. H., Myran, S., & Workman, D. (1999, April). The impact of mandated statewide testing on teachers' classroom assessment and instructional practices. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
52.
McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of reform. New York: Routledge.
53.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
54.
O'Day, J. A., & Smith, M. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educational opportunity. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 250-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
55.
Odden, A., & Busch, C. (1998). Financing schools for high performance: Strategies for improving the use of educational resources. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
56.
Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1996). Context, courses and the curriculum: Local responses to state policy reform. Educational Policy, 10, 399-421.
57.
Russo, C. J. (1995). School based decision making: Councils and school boards in Kentucky: Trusted allies or irreconcilable foes? West Education Law Quarterly, 4(3), 398-412.
58.
Sandidge, R. F., Russo, C. J., Harris, J. J., III, & Ford, H. H. (1996). School-based decision making, American style: Perspectives and practices throughout the United States. Interchange, 27(3-4), 313-329.
59.
Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
60.
Schon, D. A. (1981). A review of the federal role in curriculum development, 1950-1980. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 5, 55-61.
61.
Shipps, D. (1998). Corporate influence on Chicago school reform. In C. N. Stone (Ed.), Changing urban education (pp. 161-183). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
62.
Skrla, L. (2001, May). Accountability, equity and complexity. Educational Researcher, 30(4), 15-21.
63.
Smith, B. (1998). It's about time: Opportunities to learn in Chicago's elementary schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
64.
Smith, M. S., & O'Day, J. A. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233-268). Bristol, PA: Falmer.
65.
Smyth, J. (1995). Devolution and teachers' work: The underside of a complex phenomenon. Educational Management & Administration, 23(3), 168-175.
66.
Stetcher, B. M., & Barron, S. (1999, April). Test-based accountability: The perverse consequences of milepost testing. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
67.
Summers, A. A., & Johnson, A. W. (1996). The effects of school-based management plans. In E. A. Hanushek & D. W. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America's schools: The role of incentives (pp. 75-96). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
68.
Toch, T. (1991). In the name of excellence: The struggle to reform the nation's schools, why it's failing, and what should be done. New York: Oxford University Press.
69.
Tyack, D. (1993). School governance in the United States: Historical puzzles and anomalies. In J. Hannaway & M. Carnoy (Eds.), Decentralization and school improvement, 1-32. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
70.
Whitty, G., Power, S., & Halpin, D. (1998). Devolution & choice in education: The school, the state and the market. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
71.
Wilson, S. M., & Floden, R. E. (2001). Hedging bets: Standards-based reform in classrooms. In S. F. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 193-216). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
72.
Wohlstetter, P., Wenning, R., & Briggs, K. L. (1995). Charter schools in the United States: The question of autonomy. Educational Policy, 9(4), 331-358.
73.
Wong, K. K., & Anagnostopoulos, D. (1998). Can integrated governance reconstruct teaching? Lessons learned from two low-performing Chicago high schools. Educational Policy, 12(1-2), 31-47.
74.
Wong, K. K., Anagnostopoulos, D., Rutledge, S., Lynn, L., & Dreeben, R. (1999). Implementation of an educational accountability agenda: Integrated governance in the Chicago public schools enters its fourth year. Chicago: Department of Education and Irving B. Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies, The University of Chicago.
