This case describes how a newly appointed superintendent implemented systematic changes across the school district to increase academic performance and keep schools open and operational. The district superintendent and leadership team were forced by the state educational system to promote rapid and drastic organizational and academic changes to avoid district closure. These changes implied a new district performance policy, and it was promoted while navigating challenges related to local district politics, the internal culture of dysfunctionality and disarray, and the state educational system.
AllisonM.KayeJ. (2005). Strategic planning for nonprofit organizations (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
2.
CollinsJ.HansenM. T. (2011). Great by choice: Uncertainty, chaos, and luck—why some thrive despite them all. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
3.
FullanM. G. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
JacksonT. O. (2015). Perspectives and insights from preservice teachers of color on developing culturally responsive pedagogy at predominantly white institutions. Action in Teacher Education, 37, 223-237.
5.
JamesJ.DiezmannC. (2013). Community partnerships for fostering student interest and engagement in STEM. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14, 47-55.
MintropH.TrujilloT. (2005). Corrective action in low-performing schools: Lessons for NCLB implementation from state and district strategies in first-generation accountability systems. Retrieved from http://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/summary.asp?report=657
8.
PeckC.ReitzugU. C. (2013). School turnaround fever: The paradoxes of a historical practice promoted as a new reform. Urban Education, 49, 8-38.
9.
TilestonD. W.DarlingS. K. (2008). Why culture counts: Teaching children of poverty. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
