Power to the principals: Decentralization in three large school districts

Organization Science

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 298-307

  Ouchi, William G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Decentralization; K 12 school systems; Organization design; Organization structure; Organization theory; Organizational control; Organizational economics; School management; Schools

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645566938     PISSN: 10477039     EISSN: 15265455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0172     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Beck, L., J. Murphy. 1996. The Four Imperatives of a Successful School Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA.
2. Blau, P. M., R. Schoenherr. 1971. The Structure of Organizations. Basic Books, New York.
3. Bryk, A. S., P. Bender Sebring, D. Kerbow, S. Rollow, J. Q. Easton. 1998. Charting Chicago School Reform: Democratic Localism as a Lever for Chang. Westview, Boulder, CO.
4. Chandler, A. D., Jr. 1977. The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA.
5. Chapman, R. 1973. Decentralization: Another perspective. Comparative Ed. 9(Oct) 127-134.
6. Chubb, J. E., T. M. Moe. 1990. Politics, Markets, and America's Schools. The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
7. Cooper, B. S., Assoc. 1994. Making money matter in education: A micro-financial model for determining school-level allocations, efficiency, and productivity. J. Ed. Finance 20(Summer) 66-87.
8. Corcoran, T., J. B. Christman. 2002. The limits and contradictions of reform: The Philadelphia story. Report, Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Philadelphia, PA (Nov).
9. Ferris, J. M. 1992. School-based decision making: A principal-agent perspective. Ed. Evaluation Policy Anal. 14(4) 333-346.
10. Fiske, E. B., H. F. Ladd. 2000. When Schools Compete: A Cautionary Tale. Brookings, Washington, D.C.
11. Goertz, M. E., G. A. Hess, Jr. 1998. Processes and power in school budgeting across four large urban school districts. J. Ed. Finance 23(4) 490-506.
12. Greene, J. P. 2001. High school graduation rates in the United States. Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, New York (Nov).
13. Hannaway, J. 1993. Decentralization in two school districts: Challenging the standard paradigm. J. Hannaway, M. Carnoy, eds. Decentralization and School Improvement. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 135-162.
14. Hannaway, J. 1996. Management decentralization and performance-based incentives: Theoretical considerations for schools. E. A. Hanushek, D. W. Jorgenson, eds. Improving America's Schools: The Role of Incentives. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 97-109.
15. Harris, L. 2004. Report on the status of public school education in California 2004: With special emphasis on the status of equality in public school education. William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Palo Alto, CA, 7-9.
16. Honig, M. 2003. The view from the edge: The progress of Oakland unified school district's central office in the implementation of site-based decision-making and new small autonomous schools. College of Education, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 26.
17. Honig, M. I. 2004. District central office-community partnerships: From contracts to collaboration to control. Educational Administration, Policy, and Reform: Research and Measurement. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, 59-90.
18. Joyce, B., E. Calhoun, eds. Learning Experiences in School Renewal: An Exploration of Five Successful Programs. ERIC Clearing-house on Educational Management, Eugene, OR.
19. Malen, B. 1994. Enacting site-based management: A political utilities analysis. Ed. Evaluation Political Anal 16(3) 249-267.
20. March, J. G., H. A. Simon. 1958. Organizations. Wiley, New York.
21. McAdams, D. R. 2000. Fighting to Save Our Urban Schools ... and Winning! Teachers College, New York.
22. McNeil, L. M. 1999. Contradictions of Control: School Structure and School Knowledge. Routledge, New York, 234.
23. McNeil, L. M. 2000. Contradictions of School Reform: Educational Costs of Standardized Testing. Routledge, New York, 304.
24. Miles, K. Hawley, M. Roza. 2004. Understanding student-based budgeting as a means to greater school resource equity. Working paper.
25. Miles, K. Hawley, M. Roza, K. Ware. 2003. Leveling the playing field: Creating funding equity through student-based budgeting. Phi Delta Kappan 85(2) 114-119.
26. Mohrman, S. A., P. Wohlstetter, & Assoc. 1994. School-Based Management: Organizing for High Performance. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
27. Oakes, J., K. Hunter Quartz, S. Ryan, M. Lipton. 2000. Becoming Good American Schools: The Struggle for Civic Virtue in Education Reform. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 385.
28. O'Day, J. A. 2002. Complexity, accountability, and school improvement. Harvard Ed. Rev. 72(3) 1-31.
29. Odden, A., C. Busch. 1998. Financing Schools for High Performance. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
30. Ouchi, W. G., L. G. Segal. 2003. Making Schools Work: A Revolutionary Plan to Get Your Children the Education They Need. Simon and Schuster, New York.
31. Petko, Mike. 2005. Weighted Student Formula (WSF): What is it and How Does it Impact Educational Programs in Large Urban Districts? National Education Association, Washington, D.C.
32. Ravitch, D. 1974. The Great School Wars: A History of the New York City Public Schools. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
33. Roza, M., P. Hill. 2004. How within district spending inequities help some schools to fail. D. Ravitch, ed. Brookings Papers on Education Policy. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
34. Seattle Public Schools. 2001. Budget Allocations to the Seattle Schools for the 2001-2002 School Year. Seattle Public Schools, Seattle, WA.
35. Segal, L. 2004. Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools. Northeastern University Press, Boston, MA.
36. Sizer, T. R. 1992. Horace's School: Redesigning the American High School. Houghton Mifflin, New York.
37. Snipes, J., F. Doolittle, C. Herlihy. 2002. Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school systems improve student achievement. Report, Council of the Great City Schools, Washington, D.C. (Sep).
38. Stanford, J. 1999. Victory In Our Schools. Bantam, New York.
39. State of Hawaii. 2004. Twenty-Second Legislature. Act 51 (May) 84.
40. Stein, M. K., L. Hubbard, H. Mehan. 2004. Reform ideas that travel far afield: The two cultures of reform in New York City's district #2 and San Diego. J. Ed. Change 5 161-197.
41. Strembitsky, M. A. 1997. Accountability: Perception versus reality. School Bus. Affairs 63(11) 3-5.
42. Terrien, F. C., D. C. Mills. 1955. The effects of changing size upon the internal structure of an organization. Amer. Soc. Rev. 20(Feb) 11-13.
43. Tucker, M. S., J. B. Codding. 1998. Standards for Our Schools. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
44. Tyack, D., L. Cuban. 1995. Tinkering Toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
45. Van Langen, A., H. Dekkers. 2001. Decentralization and combating educational exclusion. Comparative Ed. 37(3) 367-384.
46. Walberg, H. J., S. J. Paik, A. Komukai, K. Freeman. 2000. Decentralization: An international perspective. Ed. Horizons 78(3) 153-164.
47. Washington State House of Representatives. 1990. Report of an evaluation of the Seattle public schools. Washington State (Nov).
48. Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. Free Press, New York.
49. Williamson, O. E., W. G. Ouchi. 1981. The markets and hierarchies and visible hand perspectives. A. H. Van de Ven, W. E. Joyce, eds. Perspectives on Organization Design and Behavior. Wiley, New York, 347-370.
50. Wohlstetter, P., A. Van Kirk, P. J. Robertson, S. A. Mohrman. 1997. Successful School-Based Management: A Report with Cases. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA.
51. Young, B. Aronstamm. 2002. Characteristics of the 100 largest public elementary and secondary school districts in the United States: 2000-01. National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, D.C.