Adoption and adaptation: School district responses to state imposed learning and graduation requirements

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 143-168

  Sipple, John W ^a   Killeen, Kieran ^b   Monk, David H ^c  

^a Cornell University ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

^c PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Policy implementation; School district organization; Standards based reform

Indexed keywords

EID: 4944266286     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/01623737026002143     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Arum, R. (2000). School and communities: Ecological and institutional dimensions. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 395-418.
2. Bishop, J. H., & Mane, F. (2001). The impacts of minimum competency exam graduation requirements on college attendance and early labor market success of disadvantaged students. In M. L. Kornhaber (Ed.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education (pp. 51-84). New York: Century Foundation Press.
3. Boesel, D., Alsalam, N., & Smith, T. M. (1998). Educational and labor market performance of GED recipients. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
4. Chaplin, D. (1999). GEDs for teenagers: Are there unintended consequences?: The Urban Institute. Retrieved July 7, 2004 from http://www.urban.org/ UploadedPDF/GED.pdf.
5. Cibulka, J. G. (1995). The institutionalization of public schools: The decline of legitimating myths and the politics of organizational instability. In R. T. Ogawa (Ed.), Advances in research and theories of school management and educational policy (Vol. 3, pp. 123-157).
6. Cibulka, J. G. (1996). The reform and survival of American public schools: An institutional perspective. In H. B. Mawhinney (Ed.), The politics of education and the new institutionalism. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
7. Cimbricz, S. (2002). State-mandated testing and teachers' beliefs and practice. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(2), Retrieved December 20, 2003 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n12.ht.
8. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. G. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2), 294-343.
9. Cuban, L. (1998). How schools change reforms: Redefining reform success and failure. Teachers College Record, 99(3), 453-477.
10. Cunningham, L. (2003). Rethinking the role of the community. In W. L. Boyd & D. Miretzky (Eds.), American educational governance on trial: Change and challenges. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11. DeBray, E., Parson, G., & Woodworth, K. (2001). Patterns of response in four high schools under state accountability policies in Vermont and New York. In S. Furhman (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 170-192). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
12. Deschenes, S., Cuban, L., & Tyack, D. B. (2001). Mismatch: Historical perspectives on schools and students who don't fit them. Teachers College Record, 103(4), 525.
13. DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns in organizations: Culture and environments (pp. 3-21). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
14. Elmore, R. F., Peterson, P. L., & McCarthey, S. J. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and school organization (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
15. Fairman, J. C., & Firestone, W. A. (2001). The district role in state assessment policy. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 124-147). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
16. Firestone, W. A. (1989). Using reform: Conceptualizing district initiative. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2), 151-164.
17. Firestone, W. A., Mayrowez, D., & Fairman, J. (1998). Performance based assessment and instructional change: The effects of testing in Maine and Maryland. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(2), 95-113.
18. Fuhrman, S. (Ed.). (2001). From the capital to the classroom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19. Fuhrman, S. H. (Ed.). (1993). Designing coherent educational policy: Improving the system. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
20. Fuhrman, S., & O'Day, J. A. (1996). Rewards and reform: Creating educational incentives that work (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
21. Goertz, G. E. (2001). Standards-based accountability: Horse trade or horse whip? In S. H. Furhman (Ed.), From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 39-59). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
22. Goertz, M. E., & Duffy, M. C. (2001). Assessment and accountability across the 50 states: Consortium for Policy Research in Education-Policy Briefs.
23. Grant, S. G. (2000a). An uncertain lever: The influence of state-level testing in New York on teaching social studies. Teachers College Record.
24. Grant, S. G. (2000b). Teachers and tests: Exploring teacher's perceptions of changes in the New York state testing program. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 5(14).
25. Haney, W. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(41).
26. Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt.
27. Jacob, B. (2001). Getting tough: The impact of high school graduation exams. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2), 99-121.
28. Knapp, M. S. (1997). Between systemic reforms and the mathematics and science classroom: The dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(2), 227-276.
29. Knapp, M. S., Bamburg, J. D., Ferguson, M. C., & Hill, P. T. (1998). Converging reforms and the working lives of frontline professionals in schools. Education Policy, 12(4), 397-418.
30. Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. H. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37-62.
31. Lortie, D. C. (1975). School teacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32. Malen, B. (2003). Tightening the grip? The impact of state activism on local school systems, Education Policy, 17(2), 195-216.
33. Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative & qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.
34. Metz, M. H. (1990). Real school; a universal drama and disparate experience. In D. E. Mitchell & M. E. Goertz (Eds.), Education politics for the new century (pp. 75-91). New York: Falmer Press.
35. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
36. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1978). The structure of educational organizations. In M. W. Meyer (Ed.), Environments and organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
37. Meyer, J. W., Scott, R., & Deal, T. E. (1983). Institutional and technical sources of organizational structure: Explaining the structure of educational organizations. In W. R. Scott (Ed.), Organizational environments: Rationality and ritual. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
38. Meyer, L., Orlofsky, G. F., Skinner, R. A., & Spicer, S. (2002). The state of the states. In quality counts 2002: Building blocks for success (a report on education in the 50 states by the editorial projects in education). Education Week, 21(17), 68-92.
39. Monk, D. H., Sipple, J. W., & Killeen, K. (2001). Adoption and adaptation: New York state school districts' responses to state imposed high school graduation requirements: An eight-year retrospective. Albany, NY: New York State Educational Finance Research Consortium Retrieved July 7, 2004 from http://www.albany.edu/edfin.
40. Monk, D. H., & Hussain, S. (1998). Resource allocation implications of increased high school graduation expectations. In Educational finance to support high learning standards (pp. 26-55). Albany, NY: New York State Board of Regents.
41. NCES. (2002). Table 106: General education development (GED) test takers, and number of distribution of credentials issued, by age: 1971 to 2001. In Digest of Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.D. Department of Education.
42. Ogawa, R. T., Sandholtz, J. H., Martines-Flores, M., & Scribner, S. P. (2003). The substantive and symbolic consequences of a district's standards-based curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 147-176.
43. Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic processes to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145-179.
44. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
45. Rowan, B., & Miskel, C. G. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), The handbook of educational administration (2nd ed., pp. 359-383), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
46. Scott, W. R. (2000). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots: A study of politics and organization. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
48. Sipple, J. W. (1999). Institutional constraints on business involvement in K-12 education policy. American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 447-488.
49. Sipple, J. W. (2004). Local anchors versus state levers in state-led school reform: Identifying the community around public schools. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Educational administration, policy, and reform: Research and measurement (Vol. 3). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
50. Sipple, J. W., & Killeen, K. (2004). Context, capacity and concern: A district-level analysis of the implementation of standards-based reform. Education Policy, 18(3). pp 456-490.
51. Skinner, R. A., & Staresina, L. N. (2004). The state of the states. In quality counts 2004: Special education in an era of standards (a report on education in the 50 states by the editorial projects in education). Education Week, 25(17), 68-92.
52. Spillane, J. P. (1998). State policy and the non-monolithic nature of the local school district: Organizational and professional consequences. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 33-63.
53. Spillane, J. P., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). Reform and teaching: Exploring patterns of practice in the context of national and state mathematics reforms. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(1), 1-27.
54. Tyack, D., & Tobin, W. (1993). The "grammar" of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 453-479.
55. Tyler, J. H. (2003). Economic benefits of the GED: Lessons from recent research. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 369.
56. Vallely, M. J. (2003). New York state's comprehensive district education planning: A script for an institutionalized response or a lever for real instructional change ? Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
57. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19.
58. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.