Charter school autonomy: The mismatch between theory and practice

Educational Policy

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 503-526

  Finnigan, Kara S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Autonomy; Charter schools; Educational policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249878485     PISSN: 08959048     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0895904806289189     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Anderson, L., Finnigan, K. (2001, April). Charter school authorizers and charter school accountability. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
2. Ascher, C., Greenberg, A. (2002). Charter reform and the education bureaucracy: Lessons from New York State. Phi Delta Kappan, 83 (7). 513-518.
3. Bulkley, K. (2003). Educational management organizations and the development of professional community (Occasional Paper No. 69). New York: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education.
4. Bulkley, K. (2004). Balancing act: Educational management organizations and charter school autonomy. In K. Bulkley P. Wolhstetter (Eds.), Taking account of charter schools: What's happened and what's next (pp. 121-141). New York: Teachers College Press.
5. Bulkley, K., Fisler, J. (2002). A decade of charter schools: From theory to practice (CPRE Policy Briefs). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
6. Corwin, R. (1996). School autonomy: How much freedom do charter schools have ? In R. Corwin J. Flaherty (Eds.), Freedom and innovation in California's charter schools (pp. 17-41). San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
7. Crawford, J. (2001). Teacher autonomy and accountability in charter schools. Education and Urban Society, 33 (2). 186-200.
8. David, J.L., Shields, P.M. (1991). From effective schools to restructuring: A literature review. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
9. Elmore, R.F. (1990). Restructuring schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
10. Fiore, T., Harwell, L.M., Blackorby, J., Finnigan, K.S. (2000). Charter schools and students with disabilities: A national study (Final report). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
11. Fuhrman, S. (1999). The new accountability (CPRE Policy Brief RB 27). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
12. Fuller, B. (2000) Breaking away or pulling together? Making decentralization work. In B. Fuller (Ed.), Inside charter schools: The paradox of radical decentralization (pp. 230-254). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Hess, F. (2001). Whaddaya mean you want to close my school? The politics of regulatory accountability in charter schooling. Education and Urban Society, 33 (2). 141-156.
14. Kolderie, T. (1990). Beyond choice to new public schools: Withdrawing the exclusive franchise in public education. Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute.
15. Kolderie, T. (1992). Chartering diversity. Equity and Choice, 9 (1). 28-31.
16. Lubienski, C. (2003). Innovation in education markets: Theory and evidence on the impact of competition and choice in charter schools. American Educational Research Journal, 40 (2). 395-443.
17. Malen, B., Ogawa, R.T. (1988). Professional-patron influence on site-based governance councils: A confounding case study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10 (4). 251-270.
18. Marsh, J.A. (2002). Democratic dilemmas: Joint work, education politics, and community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
19. McNeil, L. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.
20. Moore, S., Landman, J. (2000). Sometimes bureaucracy has its charms: The working conditions of teachers in deregulated schools. Teachers College Record, 102 (1). 85-124.
21. Nathan, J. (1996). Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22. Newmann, F. (1991). Linking restructuring to authentic student achievement. Phi Delta Kappan, 72 (6). 458-463.
23. Scott, W.R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (4 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
24. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Anchor.
25. U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Evaluation of the Public Charter Schools Program: Year one evaluation report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary, Planning and Evaluation Service, Elementary and Secondary Program Division. Available at http://www.ed.gov/ offices/OUS/PES/chartschools/index.html
26. U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Evaluation of the Public Charter Schools Program: Final report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary.
27. Vergari, S. (2001). Charter school authorizers: Public agents for holding charter schools accountable. Education and Urban Society, 33 (2). 129-140.
28. Wells, A.S. (1998). Charter school reform in California: Does it meet expectations? Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (4). 305-312.
29. Wells, A.S., Artiles, L., Carnochan, S., Cooper, C.W., Grutzik, C., Holme, J.J., et al. (1998). Beyond the rhetoric of charter school reform: A study of ten California school districts. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies.
30. Wohlstetter, P., Chau, D. (2004). Does autonomy matter? Implementing research-based practices in charter and other public schools. In K. Bulkley P. Wolhstetter (Eds.), Taking account of charter schools: What's happened and what's next (pp. 53-71). New York: Teachers College Press.
31. Wohlstetter, P., Griffin, N. (1998). Creating and sustaining learning communities: Early lessons from charter schools. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
32. Wohlstetter, P., Wenning, R., Briggs, K. (1995). Charter schools in the United States: The question of autonomy. Educational Policy, 9, 331-358.