The effect of school autonomy and school internal decentralization on students' reading literacy

School Effectiveness and School Improvement

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 303-334

  Maslowski, Ralf ^a,b   Scheerens, Jaap ^a   Luyten, Hans ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b Education Council of the Netherlands   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548316114     PISSN: 09243453     EISSN: 17445124     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09243450601147502     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bryk, T., Thum, Y., Easton, J., & Luppescu, S. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
2. Caldwell, B. J. (2002). Autonomy and self-management: Concepts and evidence. In T. Bush & L. Bell (Eds.), The Principles and Practice of Educational Management (pp. 34-48). London: Paul Chapman.
3. Caldwell, B. J., & Spinks, J. M. (1988). The self-managing school. London: Falmer Press.
4. Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets and American schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
5. Fuchs, Th., & Wößmann, L. (2004). What accounts for international differences in student performance? A re-examination using PISA data. (CESifo Working paper No. 1235). Munich, Germany: University of Munich.
6. Fullan, M., & Watson, N. (2000). School-based-management: Reconceptualizing to improve learning outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11, 453-473.
7. Ganzeboom, H. B. G., De Graaf, P. M., & Treiman, D. J. (1992). A standard international socioeconomic index of occupational status. Social Science Research, 21(1), 1-56.
8. Glass, G. V., & Matthews, D. A. (1991). Are data enough? Review of Chubb and Moe's "Politics, Markets and America's Schools". Educational Researcher, 20(3), 24-27.
9. Harker, R., & Tymms, P. (2004). The effect of student composition on school outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15, 177-199.
10. Jimenez, E., & Sawada, Y. (1998). Do community-managed schools work? An evaluation of El Salvador's EDUCO Program (Working Papers Series on Impact Evaluation of Education Reforms No. 8). Washington, DC: World Bank.
11. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
12. King, E. M., & Özler, B. (1998, April). What's decentralization got to do with learning? The case of Nicaragua's School Autonomy Reform. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
13. Leithwood, K., & Menzies, T. (1998a). Forms and effects of school-based management: A review. Educational Policy, 12(3), 325-346.
14. Leithwood, K., & Menzies, T. (1998b). A review of research concerning the implementation of site-based management. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 233-285.
15. Levačić, R. (1995). Local management of schools: Analysis and practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
16. Malen, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Kranz, J. (1990). What do we know about school-based management? A case study of the literature - a call for research. In W. H. Clune & J. F. Witte (Eds.), Choice and control in American education (Vol. 2): The practice of choice, decentralization and school restructuring (pp. 289-342). London: Falmer Press.
17. McEwan, P. J. (2000). Comparing the effectiveness of public and private schools: A review of evidence and interpretations (National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education Occasional Paper No. 3). New York, NY: NCSPE, Teachers College, Columbia University.
18. Murphy, J., & Beck, L. G. (1995). School-based management as school reform: Taking stock. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
19. OECD. (1999a). PISA Sampling Manual: Main Study version 1. Paris: OECD. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/53/20/ 33688267.doc.
20. OECD. (1999b). Measuring student knowledge and skills: A new framework for assessment. Paris: OECD.
21. OECD. (2001a). School questionnaire. Paris: OECD. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/53/32/33687708.doc.
22. OECD. (2001b). Student questionnaire. Paris: OECD. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/52/54/33687639.doc.
23. OECD. (2001c). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD. Retrieved July 8, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/ 44/53/33691596.pdf.
24. OECD. (2002a). Programme for International Student Assessment: Sample tasks from the PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. Paris: OECD. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/62/33692744.pdf.
25. OECD. (2002b). Manual for the PISA 2000 Database. Paris: OECD. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/53/18/33688135. pdf.
26. OECD. (2002c). PISA 2000 technical report. Paris: OECD. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/53/19/33688233.pdf.
27. OECD. (2004). Education at a glance. Paris: OECD.
28. OECD. (2005). School factors related to quality and equity: Results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD. Retrieved June 6, 2005, from www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/20/34668095.pdf.
29. Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1985). School reform: The district policy implications of the effective schools literature. Elementary School Journal, 85, 353-389.
30. Rasbash, J., Browne, W., Goldstein, H., Yang, M., Plewis, I., Healy, M., Woodhouse, G., Draper, D., Langford, I., & Lewis, T. (2000). A user's guide to MlwiN. London: Insitute of Education.
31. Smith, K. B., & Meier, K. J. (1995). The case against school choice: Politics, markets, and fools. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
32. Somers, M.-A., McEwan, P. J., & Willms, J. D. (2004). How effective are private schools in Latin-America. Comparative Education Review, 48, 48-69.
33. Summers, A. A., & Johnson, A. W. (1996). The effects of school-based management plans. In E. A. Hanushek & D. W. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America's schools: The role of incentives (pp. 84-91). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34. Whitty, G., Power, S., & Halpin, D. (1998). Devolution and choice in education: The school, the state and the market Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
35. Wijnstra, J. M. (2001). Bruikbare kennis en vaardigheden voorjonge menen. Arnhem: Citogroep.
36. Winkler, D. R., & Gershberg, A. I. (2000). Education decentralization in Latin America: The effects on the quality of schooling (LCSHD Paper Series No. 59). Washington, DC: World Bank.
37. Witte, J. F. (1990). Understanding high school achievement: After a decade of research, do we have any confident policy recommendations? Paper presented at the 1990 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.
38. Wößmann, L. (2003). Schooling resources, educational institutions and student performance: The international evidence. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65(2), 117-170.