This qualitative study examines how accountability policies impact school principals’ social justice commitment. The study involved semi-structured interviews with twenty-two Ontario principals. Findings show that principals responded to the accountability policies with strikingly mixed emotions. Some grudgingly accepted the mandates and reluctantly sought to accommodate directives in their agenda. Some critiqued the reforms by highlighting the inequities and drawbacks in the performance-based tests. Others showed significant resistance to the reform and strategically used their power to navigate toward what they felt was best for their students. Such mixed sentiments among principals revealed a deeper struggle among them in navigating the system.
AchillesC. M., KeedyJ. L., & HighR. M. (1999). The workday world of the principal: How principals get things done. In HughesL. W. (2nd edition), The principal as leader (pp. 25–59). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
2.
Adler-KassnerL., & HarringtonS. (2010). Responsibility and composition's future in the twenty-first century: Reframing “accountability”. College Composition and Communication, 61(1), 73–99.
3.
AlemánE.Jr. (2009). Leveraging conflict for social justice: How “leadable” moments can transform school culture. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 12(4), 1–16.
4.
AndersonG. L. (2009). Advocacy leadership: Toward a post-reform agenda in education.New York, NY: Routledge.
5.
AngelisM. De. (2007). Talking about social justice and leadership in a context of accountability. Journal of Educational Administration and Foundation, 18(1/2), 24–51.
6.
BatesR. (2006). Educational administration and social justice. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 1(2), 141–156.
7.
BiestaG. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: On the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 33–46.
8.
BlackW. R., & ValenzuelaA. (2004). Educational accountability for English language learners in Texas: A retreat from equity. In SkrlaL., & ScheurichJ. J. (Eds.), Educational equity and accountability: Paradigms, policies, and politics. (pp. 215–234). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
9.
BrymerE., & GrayT. (2006). Effective leadership: Transformational or transactional?Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 10(2), 13–19.
10.
CohenL., ManionL., & MorrisonK. (2011). Research methods in education. (7th edition). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
11.
DiemS., & BoskeC. (2012). Introduction: Advancing leadership for social justice in a globalized world. In BoskeC., DiemS., & NormoreA. (Eds.), Global leadership for social justice: Taking it from the field to practice (pp. xvxix). Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
12.
EacottS., & NorrisJ. (2014). Managerial rhetoric, accountability, and school leadership in contemporary Australia. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 13(2), 169–187.
13.
FrickW. C. (2009). Principals’ value-informed decision making, intrapersonal moral discord, and pathways to resolution: The complexities of moral leadership praxis. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(1), 50–74.
14.
FullanM. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
15.
FullanM. (2008). The six secrets of change.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
16.
GewirtzS. (1998). Conceptualizing social justice in education: Mapping the territory. Journal of Educational Policy, 13(4), 469–484.
17.
GiddensA. (1976). New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretative sociologies.London: Hutchinson.
18.
GoldfarbK. P., & GrinbergJ. (2002). Leadership for social justice: Authentic participation in the case of a community center in Caracas, Venezuela. Journal of School Leadership, 12(2), 157–173.
19.
GrossS. J. (2006). (Re-) Constructing a movement for social justice in our profession. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 10(30), 1–8.
20.
GubaE., & LincolnY. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21.
GunzenhauserM. G., & HydeA. M. (2007). What is the value of public school accountability?Educational Theory, 57(4), 489–507.
22.
HaneyW. (2004). Response to Skrla et al. The illusion of educational equity in Texas: A commentary of “Accountability for Equity”. In SkrlaL., & ScheurichJ. J. (Eds.), Educational equity and accountability: Paradigms, policies, and politics (pp. 215–234). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
23.
HarrisA., & ChapmanC. (2002). Effective leadership in schools facing challenging circumstances.Nottingham, UK: National College for School Leadership (NCSL).
24.
HughesL. W. (Ed.) (1999). The principal as leader.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
25.
JohnsonJ.P., LivingstonM., SchwartzR.A., & SlateJ. R. (2000). What makes a good elementary school? A critical examination. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(6), 339–353.
26.
KarpinskiC. F., & LuggC. A. (2006). Social justice and educational administration: Mutually exclusive?Journal of Educational Administration, 44(3), 278–292.
27.
KeedyJ. L. (1982). A factor in principal effectiveness: Norm setting. The Catalyst for Change, 11(3), 26–29.
28.
KnappM. S., & FeldmanS. B. (2012). Managing the intersection of internal and external accountability: Challenge for urban school leadership in the United States. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(5), 666–694.
29.
LambertL. (2006). A study of high leadership capacity schools. The Educational Forum, 70(3), 238–254.
30.
LeithwoodK., & RiehlC. (2005). What we know about successful school leadership. In FirestoneW., & RiehlC. (Eds.), A new agenda: Directions for research on educational leadership (pp. 22–47). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
31.
LortieD. C. (2009). School principal: Managing in public.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32.
LuggC. A. (2003). Sissies, faggots, lezzies and dykes: Gender, sexual orientation, and a new politics of education. Educational Administrative Quarterly, 39(1), 95–134.
33.
LuggC. A., & ShohoA. R. (2006). Dare public school administrators build a new social order? Social justice and the possibly perilous politics of educational leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(3), 196–208.
34.
LynchK., & BakerJ. (2005). Equality in education: An equality of condition perspective. Theory and Research in Education, 3(2), 131–164.
35.
MacBeathJ. (2007). Leadership as a subversive activity. Journal of Educational Administration, 45(3), 242–264.
36.
MacBeathJ. (2008). Stories of compliance and subversion in prescriptive policy environment. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 36(1), 123–148.
37.
McEwanE. (2003). 7 steps to effective instructional leadership.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
38.
McKenzieK. B., & ScheurichJ. J. (2008). Teacher resistance to improvement of schools with diverse students. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11(2), 117–133.
39.
McNeilL., & ValenzuelaA. (2001). The harmful impact of the TAAS system of testing in Texas: Beneath the accountability rhetoric. In OrfieldG., & KornhaberM. L. (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stake testing in public education (pp. 127–150). New York: The Century Foundation Press.
40.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study: Applications in education.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
41.
MillsJ., BonnerA., & FrancisK. (2006). The development of constructivist grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods5(1), 110.
42.
MollerJ. (2009). School leadership in an age of accountability: Tensions between managerial and professional accountability. Journal of Educational Change, 10(1), 37–46.
43.
PortelliJ. P., & SimpsonD. J. (2007). Critical democracy and leadership issues: Philosophical responses to the neoliberal agenda. Journal of Thought, 42(1/2), 3–7.
44.
RansonS. (2003). Public accountability in the age of neo-liberal governance. Journal of Educational Policy, 18(5), 459–180.
45.
RossJ. A., & GlazeA. (2005, August). Creating turn around schools: The effects of project REACH on students, teachers, principals and support staff. Toronto, ON: Final Report to the Ontario Principals Council.
46.
RyanJ. (2010). Promoting social justice in schools: principals’ political strategies. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13(4), 357–376.
47.
RyanJ. (2012). Struggling for inclusion: Educational leadership in neoliberal world (Issues in the research, theory, policy, and practice of urban education).Information Age Publishing.
48.
SergiovanniT. J. (2001). Leadership: What's in it for schools?RoutledgeFalmer.
49.
ShieldsC. M. (2004). Dialogic leadership for social justice: Overcoming pathologies of silence. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 109–132.
50.
ShieldsC. M. (2013). Transformative leadership in education: Equitable change in an uncertain and complex world.New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
51.
SkrlaL., & ScheurichJ. J. (Eds.). (2004). Educational equity and accountability: Paradigms, policies, and politics.New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
52.
SkrlaL., ScheurichJ. J., JohnsonJ. F., & KoschoreckJ. W. (2001). Accountability for equity: Can state policy leverage social justice?International Journal of Leadership in Education, 4(3), 237–260.
53.
StrikeK. A. (2007). Ethical leadership in schools: Creating community in an environment of accountability.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
54.
TheoharisG. (2007). Social justice educational leaders and resistance: Toward a theory of social justice leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221–258.
WangF. (2015). Leadership as a subversive activity: Principals’ perception. Paper presented at the annual meeting of University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA), San Diego, CA., U.S.
57.
WangL., BeckettG. H., & BrownL. (2006). Controversies of standardized assessment in school accountability reform: A critical synthesis of multidisciplinary research evidence. Applied Measurement in Education, 19(4), 305–328.
58.
WestM., AinscowM., & StanfordJ. (2005). Sustaining improvement in schools in challenging circumstances: A study of successful practices. School Leadership and Management, 25(1), 77–93.
59.
WillisL. (2010). Is the process of special measures an effective tool for bringing about authentic school improvement?Management in Education, 24(4), 142–148.
60.
YoungI. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
