Abstract
National and state governments mandate policies that regulate and support the provision of public education in primary and secondary schools. School personnel are expected to enact the delivery of education in accordance with government policies. In many countries intermediary organizations exist that are authorized to manage the allocation of education resources and the implementation of education policies for sets of schools clustered within the boundaries of specific geographic and/or demographic divisions (e.g., linguistic, religious). The names most commonly associated with these intermediary organizations are school district or local education authority (further references will be to the school district as the generic term). This chapter considers past and recent research on school district-level policy as it relates to change and improvement in primary and secondary education. The emphasis will be on district policies that are intended to enable district-wide improvement in teaching and learning
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
American Federation of Teachers (2001). Making standards matter. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers.
Berman, P. (1980). Thinking about programmed and adaptive implementation: Matching strategies to situations. In H. Ingram & D. Mann (Eds.), Why policies succeed or fail (pp. 205–227). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Berman P. (1981). Educational change: An implementation paradigm. In R. Lehming & M. Kane (Eds.), Improving schools: Using what we know (pp. 17–41). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M. (1978). Implementation of educational innovation. Educational Forum, 40(3), 345–370.
Berman, P., Weiler, D., Czesak, K., Gjelten, T., & Izu, J. A. (1981). Improving school improvement: A policy evaluation of the California School Improvement Program. Berkeley, CA: Berman, Weiler Associates.
Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(4), 305–331.
Cawelti, G., & Protheroe, N. (2001). High student achievement: How six school districts changed into high-performance systems. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
Chubb, J., & Moe, T. (1990). Politics, markets and America’s schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Corbett, H. D., & Ross, G. B. (1989). Three paths to implementing change: A research note. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(2), 163–190.
Corcoran, T., Fuhrman, S., & Belcher, C. (2001). The district role in instructional improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, September, 78–84.
Cuban, L. (1984). Transforming the frog into a prince: Effective schools research, policy, and practice at the district level. Harvard Educational Review, 54(2), 129–151.
Datnow, A., Hubbard, L., & Mehan, H. (2002). Extending educational reform from one school to many. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Elmore, R. (1978). Organizational models of social program implementation. Public Policy, 26(2), 185–228.
Elmore, R. (1993). The role of local school districts in instructional improvement. In S. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 96–124). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: The Albert Shanker Institute.
Elmore, R. (with Burney, D.) (1997). Investing in teacher learning: Staff development and instructional improvement in Community School District #2, New York City: Consortium for Policy Research in Education and National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Farrell, J. (2002). The Aga Khan Foundation experience compared with emerging alternatives to formal schooling. In S. Anderson (Ed.), Improving schools through teacher development: Case studies of the Aga Khan Foundation Projects in East Africa (pp. 247–270). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
Firestone, W. (1989). Using reform: Conceptualizing district initiative. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2), 151–164.
Floden, R., Porter, A., Alford, L., Freeman, D., Irwin, S., Schmidt, W., & Schwille, J. (1988). Instructional leadership at the district level: A closer look at autonomy and control. Educational Administration Quarterly, 24(2), 96–124.
Fullan, M. (1981). The meaning of educational change. Toronto, ON: OISE Press.
Fullan, M. (with Stiegelbauer, S.) (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1(1), 5–28.
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd Edition). New York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M., Anderson, S. E., & Newton, E. (1986). Support systems for implementing curriculum in school boards. Toronto, ON: Ontario Government Bookstore.
Fuller, B., & Elmore, R. (1996). Who chooses? Who loses? New York: Teachers College Press.
Fuhrman, S., Clune, W., & Elmore, R. (1988). Research on education reform: Lessons on the implementation of policy. Teachers College Record, 90(2), 237–57.
Furhman, S., & Elmore, R. (1990). Understanding local control in the wake of state education reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(1), 82–96.
Guba, E. (1984). The effect of definition of policy on the nature and outcomes of policy analysis. Educational Leadership, October, 63–70.
Hall, G., & Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Hightower, A. (2002). San Diego’s big boom: Systemic instructional change in the central office and schools. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 76–93). New York: Teachers College Press.
Hightower, A., Knapp, M., S., Marsh, J., & McLaughlin, M. (2002). The district role in instructional renewal: Making sense and taking action. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 193–201). New York: Teachers College Press.
House, E. (1981). Three perspectives on innovation: Technological, political, and cultural. In R. Lehming & M. Kane (Eds.), Improving schools: Using what we know (pp. 17–41). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
House, E., & McQuillan, P. (1998). Three perspectives on school reform. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International Handbook of Educational Change (Part One) (pp. 198–213). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
King, M. B., Chawszczewski, D., & Beane, J. (2000). District wide standards-based reform and its impact on school culture, teaching & learning. Prepared for the Research on School Reform Initiative, Spencer Foundation. August, 2000.
LaRocque, L., & Coleman, P. (1990). Quality control: School accountability and district ethos. In M. Holmes, K. Leithwood, & D. Musella (Eds.), Educational policy for effective schools (pp. 168–191). Toronto, ON: OISE Press.
Leithwood, K., & Menzies, T. (1998). A review of research concerning the implementation of school-based management. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(3), 233–285.
Levin, H. (1991). The economics of educational choice. Economics of Education Review, 10(2), 137–158.
Louis, K. S. (1989). The role of the school district in school improvement. In M. Holmes, K. Leithwood & D. Musella (Eds.), Educational policy for effective schools (pp. 145–167). Toronto, ON: OISE Press.
Louis, K. S., & Miles, M. (1990). Improving the urban high school: What works and why. New York: Teachers College Press.
Marsh, J. (2002). How districts relate to states, schools, and communities: A review of emerging literature. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 25–40). New York: Teachers College Press.
Massell, D., & Goertz, M. (2002). District strategies for building instructional capacity. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 43–60). New York: Teachers College Press.
McDonnell, L., & Elmore, R. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 133–152.
McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2002). Reforming districts. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh, & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 173–192). New York: Teachers College Press.
Murphy, J., & Datnow, A. (Eds.) (2003). Leadership lessons from comprehensive school reforms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Murphy, J., & Hallinger, P. (1988). Characteristics of instructionally effective districts. Journal of Educational Research, 81(3), 175–181.
O’Day, J., Goertz, M., & Floden, R. (1995). Building capacity for education reform. CPRE Policy Briefs. RB-18-December. Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Purkey, S., & Smith, M. (1985). School reform: The district policy implications of the effective school literature. The Elementary School Journal, 85(3), 353–89.
Resnick, L., & Glennan, T. (2002). Leadership for learning: A theory of action for urban school districts. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 160–172). New York: Teachers College Press.
Rolheiser-Bennett, C., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Administrative support of cooperative learning: Converging paths to implementation. Journal of Research for School Executives, 1(Winter 1991–92), 84–92.
Rosenholtz, S. (1989). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.
Ross, J., Hannay, L., & Brydges, B. (1998). District-level support for site-based renewal: A case study of secondary school reform. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 44(4), 349–365.
Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. MDRC for the Council of the Great City Schools.
Snyder, J. (2002). New Haven Unified School District: A teaching quality system for excellence and equity. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 94–110). New York: Teachers College Press.
Spillane, J. P. (1996). Districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy, 10, 63–87.
Spillane, J. P. (1998). State policy and the non-monolithic nature of the local school district: Organizational and professional considerations. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 33–63.
Spillane, J. P. (2002). District policy making and state standards: A cognitive perspective on implementation. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 143–159). New York: Teachers College Press.
Spillane, J. P., & Thompson, C. (1997). Reconstructing conceptions of local capacity: The local education agency’s capacity for ambitious instructional reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19(2), 185–203.
Stein, M. K., & D’Amico, L. (2002). The district as a professional learning laboratory. In A. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. Marsh, & M. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal (pp. 61–75). New York: Teachers College Press.
Stringfield, S., & Ross, S. M. (1997). A reflection at mile three of a marathon: The Memphis Restructuring Initiative in mid-stride. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8(1), 151–161.
Thiessen, D., & Anderson, S. E. (1999). Getting into the habit of change in Ohio schools: The cross-case study of 12 transforming learning communities. Columbus, OH: Ohio Department of Education.
Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. Washington, DC: The Learning First Alliance and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Togneri. W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). How high poverty districts improve. Leadership 33(1), 22–25.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Anderson, S.E., Togneri, W. (2005). School District-Wide Reform Policies in Education. In: Bascia, N., Cumming, A., Datnow, A., Leithwood, K., Livingstone, D. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Policy. Springer International Handbooks of Education, vol 13. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3201-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3201-3_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3189-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3201-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)