Educational leaders as policy analysts

The SAGE Handbook of Educational Leadership: Advances in Theory, Research, and Practice, First Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 191-215

  Malen, Betty ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 63549123851     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781412976091.n9     Document Type: Chapter

References (138)

1. Allison, G., & Zelikow, P. (1999). Essence of decision (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
2. Anyon, J. (1997). Ghetto schooling: The political economy of urban educational reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
3. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1982). Theory in practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Baumgartner, F. Jones, B.Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems. Journal of Politics 53 (1991). 1044-1074.
5. Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Brewer, D. J. Krop, C. Gill, B. P. Reichardt, R.Estimating the cost of national class reduction under different policy alternatives. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 2 (1999). 179-192.
8. Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S. G., & Sebring, P. A. (1993). A view from the elementary schools: The state of reform in Chicago. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
9. Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. A., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S. G., & Easton, J. Q. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
10. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper Colophon Books.
11. Callahan, D., & Jennings, B. (1983). Ethics, the social sciences, and policy analysis. New York: Plenum Press.
12. Chambers, J., & Parrish, T. (1983). The development of a resources cost model funding base for education finance in Illinois. Stanford, CA: Associates for Education Finance and Planning.
13. Chambers, S. (2003). Urban education reform and minority political empowerment. Political Science Quarterly 117 (4) (2002)643-665.
14. Clegg, S. R. (1989). Frameworks of power. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15. Cobb, R. W., & Ross, M. H. (1997). Cultural strategies of agenda denial: Avoidance, attack, and redefinition. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
16. Cohen, D. L., & Hill, H. C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17. Cooper, B. F., & Randall, E. V. (1999). Advocacy or accuracy: The politics of research in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
18. Croninger, R. C Lee, V. E.Social capital and dropping out of high school: Benefits to at-risk students of teachers' support and guidance. Teachers College Record 103 (4) (2001). 548-581.
19. Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1990 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
20. Cuban, L.How schools change reforms: Redefining reform success and failure. Teachers College Record 99 (1998). 453-477.
21. Dahl, R. A. (1984). Modern political analysis (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
22. Dahl, R. A., & Stinebrickner, B. (2003). Modern political analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23. Dodd, L. C, & Jillson, C. (1994). The dynamics of American politics: Approaches and interpretations. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
24. Easton, D.Political science in the United States: Past, present, and future. International Political Science Review 6 (1985). 133-152.
25. Edelman, M. (1964). The symbolic uses of politics. Champaign-Urbana: University of Illinois.
26. Elmore, R. F., Peterson, P. L., & Mc Carthy, S. J. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and school organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Elmore, R. F., & Rothman, R. (1999). Testing, teaching, and learning: A guide for states and school districts. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. Elmore, R. C, & Sykes, G. (1992). Curriculum policy. In P. W.Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 185-215). New York: Macmillan.
29. Fager, J. (1993). The 'rules' still rule: The failure of school-based management/shared decision-making in the New York City public schools. New York: Parents Coalition for Education in NYC.
30. Firestone, W. A.Education policy as an ecology of games. Educational Researcher 18 (7) (1989a). 18-24.
31. Firestone, W. A.Using reform: Conceptualizing district initiative. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11 (2) (1989b). 151-164.
32. Fischer, F. (1999). Technocracy and the politics of expertise. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33. Fowler, F. C. (2000). Policy studies for educational leaders. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
34. Fuhrman, S. H. (1993). Designing coherent education policy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
35. Fuhrman, S. (2001). From the capital to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36. Fuhrman, S. H. Elmore, R. F.Understanding local control in the wake of state education reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 12 (1) (1990). 82-96.
37. Galvin, P. (2000). Organizational boundaries, authority, and school district organization. In N. D.Theobald & B.Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 279-310). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
38. Gamson, W. A. (2002). Talking politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39. Gaventa, J. (1980). Power and powerlessness, quiescence and rebellion in an Appalachian valley. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
40. Geary, L. S. (1992). The policymaking process resulting in fiscal policy for special education in Utah. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
41. Gillon, S. M. (2000). That's not what we meant to do: Reform and its unintended consequences in twentieth century America. New York: W. W. Norton.
42. Glazer, N. (1988). The limits of social policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43. Handler, J. F. (1996). Down from bureaucracy: The ambiguity of privatization and empowerment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44. Hatch, T. (2002, April). When improvement programs collide. Phi Delta Kappan, 626-639.
45. Heineman, R. A., Bluhm, W. T., Peterson, S. A., & Kearny, E. N. (1997). The world of the policy analyst: Rationality, values & politics (2nd ed.). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
46. Henig, J. R. (1994). Rethinking school choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
47. Henig, J. R., Hula, R. C, Orr, M., & Pedescleaux, D. S. (1999). The color of reform: Race, politics, and the challenge of urban education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48. Hess, F. M. (1999). Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
49. Hess, G. A.Expectations, opportunity, capacity and will: The four essential components of Chicago school reform. Educational Policy 13 (4) (1999). 494-517.
50. Honig, M.Building policy from practice: School district central office administrators' roles and capacity for implementing collaborative education policy. Educational Administration Quarterly 39 (3) (2003). 292-338.
51. Honig, M., Kahne, J., & Mc Laughlin, M. M. (2001). School community connections: Strengthening opportunity to learn and opportunity to teach. In V.Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 998-1028). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
52. Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1995). Studying public policy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
53. Hoy, W. K., & Tarter, J. C. (2004). Administrators solving the problems of practice: Decision-making concepts, cases, and consequences. Boston: Pearson Education.
54. Ingersoll, R. M.The problem of underqualified teachers in American secondary schools. Educational Researcher 28 (2) (1999). 26-37.
55. Ingersoll, R. M.Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal 38 (3) (2001). 499-534.
56. Jenkins-Smith, H. C.Analytical debates and policy learning: Analysis and change in the federal bureaucracy. Policy Sciences 21 (1988). 169-211.
57. Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1990). Democratic politics and policy analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
58. Jones, D. R., & Malen, B. (2002). Sources of victory, seeds of defeat: Linking enactment politics and implementation developments. In W.Hoy & C.Miskel (Eds.), Theory and research in educational administration (Vol. 1, pp. 41-76). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
59. Kahne, J. (1996). Reframing educational policy. New York: Teachers College Press.
60. Kanter, R. M. (1983). The change masters. New York: Simon & Schuster.
61. Kerr, D. (1976). Educational policy. New York: Davis Mc Kay.
62. King, J. A.Meeting the educational needs of at-risk students: A cost analysis of three models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16 (1994). 1-19.
63. Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.
64. Knapp, M. S. Bamburg, J. D. Ferguson, M. C Hill, P. T.Converging reforms and the working lives of frontline professionals in schools. Education Policy 12 (4) (1998). 397-418.
65. Ladd, H. (1996). Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
66. Lee, V. E. Smith, J. B. Croninger, R. C.How high school organization influences the equitable distribution of learning in mathematics and science. Sociology of Education 70 (1997). 128-150.
67. Leithwood, K. Menzies, T.Forms and effects of school-based management: A review. Educational Policy 12 (1998). 325-346.
68. Levin, B. (2001). Reforming education: From origins to outcomes. New York: Routledge Falmer.
69. Levin, H. M., & Mc Ewan, P. (2001). Cost-effectiveness analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
70. Lewis, D. A., & Nakagawa, K. (1995). Race and educational reform in the American metropolis: A study of school decentralization. Albany: SUNY Press.
71. Lindblom, C.The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review 14 (1959). 79-88.
72. Lynn, L. E.A place at the table: Policy analysis, its postpositive critics, and the future of practice. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18 (1999). 411-425.
73. Malen, B.Site-based management: A political utilities analysis. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16 (1994). 249-267.
74. Malen, B. (1995). The micropolitics of education: Mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school polities. In J.Scribner & D.Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 147-167). New York: Falmer Press.
75. Malen, B.The promise and perils of participation on site-based councils. Theory into Practice 38 (4) (1999). 209-216.
76. Malen, B.Generating interest in interest groups. Educational Policy 15 (1) (2001). 168-186.
77. Malen, B. Croninger, R. Muncey, D. Jones, D.Reconstituting schools: Testing the theory of action. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24 (2) (2002). 113-132.
78. Malen, B. Knapp, M.Rethinking the multiple perspectives approach to education policy analysis: Implications for policy-practice connections. Journal of Education Policy 12 (1997). 419-445.
79. Malen, B., & Muncey, D. (2000). Creating "a new set of givens"? The impact of state activism on site autonomy. In N. D.Theobald & B.Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 199-244). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
80. Malen, B., Ogawa, R. T., & Kranz, J. (1990). What do we know about site-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). New York: Falmer Press.
81. Malen, B., & Rice, J. K. (2003, March). Strengthening incentives, diluting capacity: An analysis of the initial effects of high stakes accountability initiatives on local schools. Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the American Education Finance Association, Orlando, FL.
82. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: The Free Press.
83. Marsh, J. A. (2002). Democratic dilemmas: Joint work, education politics, and community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.
84. Mazzoni, T. L.Analyzing state school policymaking: An arena model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 13 (2) (1991). 115-138.
85. Mazzoni, T. L. (2000). State politics and school reform: The first decade of the "education excellence" movement. In N. D.Theobald & B.Malen (Eds.), Balancing local control and state responsibility for K-12 education (pp. 147-196). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
86. McLeese, P. (1992). The process of decentralizing conflict and maintaining stability: Site council enactment, implementation, operation, and impacts in the Salt Lake City School District 1970-1985. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
87. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge.
88. Mintrom, M. (2000). Policy entrepreneurs and school choice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
89. Mintrop, H. Gamson, D. Mc Laughlin, M. Wong, P. L. Oberman, I.Design cooperation: Strengthening the link between organizational and instructional change in schools. Educational Policy 15 (4) (2001). 520-546.
90. Miskel, C., & Song, M. (2003). Passing reading first: Prominence and processes in an elite policy network. Unpublished paper, University of Michigan.
91. Mitchell, D. E. Encarnation, D. J.Educational policy analysis: The state of the art. Educational Administration Quarterly 20 (3) (1984). 129-160.
92. Moe, T.The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science 28 (1984). 739-777.
93. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
94. Moynihan, D. P. (1969). Maximum feasible misunderstanding. New York: Free Press.
95. Muncey, D., & Mc Quillan, P. (1998). Reform and resistance in schools & classrooms. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
96. Murphy, J. T.Title I of ESEA: The politics of implementing federal education reform. Harvard Educational Review 41 (1) (1971). 35-63.
97. Newman, F. M. Smith, B. Allensworth, E. Bryk, A. S.Instructional program coherence: What it is and why it should guide school improvement policy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 23 (4) (2001). 297-321.
98. Nye, B. Hedges, L. V. Konstantopoulos, S.Do low-achieving students benefit more from smaller classes? Evidence from the Tennessee class size experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24 (3) (2002). 201-217.
99. Ogawa, R. T. Sandholtz, J. H. Martinez-Flores, M. Scribner, S. P.The substantive and symbolic consequences of a district's standards' based curriculum. American Educational Research Journal 40 (1) (2003). 147-176.
100. Orr, M. (1999). Black social capital: The politics of school reform in Baltimore, 1986-1998. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
101. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
102. Portz, J., Stein, L., & Jones, B. B. (1999). City schools and city politics: Institutions and leadership in Pittsburgh, Boston, and St. Louis. Lawrence: The University of Kansas Press.
103. Radin, B. A. (2000). Beyond Machiavelli policy analysis comes of age. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
104. Rice, J. K.Cost analysis in education: Paradox and possibility. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19 (4) (1997). 309-317.
105. Rice, J. K.The cost of working together: A framework for estimating the costs of comprehensive support systems for children. Administration & Society 33 (4) (2001). 455-479.
106. Rice, J. K. (2002a). Cost analysis in education policy research: A comparative analysis across fields of public policy. In. H. M.Levin & P.McEwan (Eds.), Cost-effectiveness analysis in education: Progress and prospects (pp. 21-36). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
107. Rice, J. K. (2002b). Making economically grounded decisions about comprehensive school reform models: Considerations of costs, effects, and contexts. In K. K.Wong & M. C.Wang (Eds.), Efficiency, accountability, and equity issues in Title I schoolwide program implementation. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
108. Rice, J. K. (2003a). Investing in teacher quality: A framework of estimating the cost of teacher professional development. In W.Hoy & C.Miskel (Eds.), Theory and research in educational administration (Vol. 2, pp. 209-233). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
109. Rice, J. K. (2003b). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
110. Rice, J. K. Malen, B.The human costs of education reform: The case of school reconstitution. Educational Administration Quarterly 39 (5) (2003). 635-661.
111. Roberts, N. C, & King, P. J. (1996). Transforming public policy: Dynamics of policy entrepre-neurship and innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
112. Rothstein, R. (2002). Out of balance: Our understanding of how schools affect society and how society affects schools. Chicago: Spencer Foundation.
113. Rowan, B., & Miskel, C. G. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. In J.Murphy & K. Seashore Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed., pp. 359-383). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
114. Sabatier, P. A. (1999). Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
115. Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
116. Schneider, A. Ingram, H.Social construction of target populations: Applications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review 87 (2) (1993). 334-347.
117. Schorr, L. B. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage. New York: Anchor Press.
118. Sebring, P. A. Bryk, A. S.Charting reform in Chicago schools: Pluralistic policy research. New Directions for Program Evaluation 59 (1993). 13-28.
119. Shipps, D.The invisible hand: Big business and Chicago school reform. Teachers College Record 99 (1997). 73-116.
120. Shipps, D. Kahne, J. Smylie, M.The politics of urban school reform: Legitimacy, city growth, and school improvement in Chicago. Educational Policy 13 (4) (1999). 518-545.
121. Shulman, L. S. (1988). Disciplines of inquiry in education: An overview. In R. M.Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education (pp. 3-17). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
122. Smith, M., & O'Day, J. (1990). Systemic school reform. In S.Fuhrman & B.Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233-267). New York: Falmer Press.
123. Smith, S. R. Ingram, H.Rethinking policy analysis: Citizens, community, and the restructuring of public services. The Good Society 11 (1) (2002). 55-60.
124. Smrekar, C.The organizational and political threats to school-linked integrated services. Educational Policy 12 (3) (1998). 284-304.
125. Spillane, J. P.School districts matter: Local educational authorities and state instructional policy. Educational Policy 10 (1996). 63-87.
126. Sroufe, G. E. (1995). Politics of education at the federal level. In J. D.Scribner & D. H.Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 75-88). New York: Falmer Press.
127. Stier, H., & Tienda, M. (2001). The color of opportunity: Pathways to family, welfare, and work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
128. Stone, C. N., Henig, J. R., Jones, B. O., & Pierannunzi, C. (2001). Building civic capacity: The politics of reforming urban schools. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
129. Tallerico, M.The dynamics of superintendent-school board relationships. Urban Education 24 (1992). 215-231.
130. Truman, D. B. (1951). The governmental process. New York: Knopf.
131. Walker, J. L., Jr. (1991). Mobilizing interest groups in America: Patrons, professions, and social movements. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
132. Weiler, H. (1993). Control versus legitimation. In J.Hannaway & M.Carnoy (Eds.), Decentralization and school improvement (pp. 55-83). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
133. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In J. P.Connell, A. C.Kubisch, L. B.Schorr, & C. H.Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives (pp. 65-92). Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
134. Wells, A. S. Serna, I.The politics of culture: Understanding local political resistance to detracking in racially mixed schools. Harvard Educational Review 66 (1996). 93-118.
135. White, J. A. Wehage, G.Community collaboration: If it is such a good idea, why is it so hard to do? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 17 (1995). 23-38.
136. Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
137. Yanow, D. (1996). How does a policy mean? Interpreting policy and organizational actions. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
138. Zimmerman, J. (2002). Whose America? Culture wars in the public schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.