This case involves overturning a 35-year-old program of weighted grading that defined a school’s identity. Examination of the practice revealed a curriculum that was discriminatory toward students and teachers with deep-seated values and beliefs among an elite group of core teachers perpetuating that discrimination. Further examination revealed unspecified differences in grading practices among staff. This case can be used in classes that consider instructional leadership, school board/superintendent relationships, superintendent/principal relationships, curriculum, school culture, and ethical decision-making.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bransford, J.D.
, Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: National Academy Press.
2.
Davis, S. H.
, & Davis, P. B. (2003). The intuitive dimensions of administrative decision-making. Lanham, MA: Scarecrow Press, Inc.
3.
Henze, R.
, Katz., A., Norte, E., Sathor, S. E., & Walker, E. (2002). Leading for diversity: How school leaders promote positive interethnic relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
4.
Hoy, W. K.
, & Miskel, C. G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (6th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
5.
Hoy, W. K.
, & Tarter, C. J. (2004). Administrators, solving the problems of practice: Decision-making concepts, cases, and consequences (2nd Edition). Boston: Pearson Education.
6.
Larson, C. L.
, & Ovando, C. J. (2001). The color of bureaucracy: The politics of equity in multicultural school communities. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomas Learning.
7.
Maxwell, J. C.
(2000). Failing forward: Turning mistakes into stepping stones for success. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
8.
McNeil, J. D.
(1985). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
