School administration in a changing education sector: The US experience

Journal of Educational Administration

Volumn 50, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 541-561

  Seashore Louis, Karen ^a   Spillane, James P ^a   Kenney, Allison W ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Administration; Educational administration; Government policy; Leadership; Schools; United States of America

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865186352     PISSN: 09578234     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/09578231211249817     Document Type: Article

References (131)

1. Amrien, A.L. and Berliner, D.C. (2002), “High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning”, Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 10 No. 18, pp. 1-70.
2. Anagnostopoulos, D. and Rutledge, S.A. (2007), “Making sense of school sanctioning policies in urban high schools: charting the depth and drift of school and classroom change”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 109 No. 5, pp. 1261-302.
3. Anderson, S.E. (2003), The School District Role in Educational Change: A Review of the Literature, International Centre for Educational Change, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto, ON.
4. Anderson, S.E. and Togneri, W. (2005), “School district-wide reform policies in education”, in Bascia, N., Cumming, A., Datnow, A., Leithwood, K.A. and Livingstone, D. (Eds), International Handbook of Education Policy, Vol. 13, Springer, Cornwall, pp. 173-94.
5. Au, W. (2007), “High-stakes testing and curricular control: a qualitative metasynthesis”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 258-67.
6. Ball, S.J. (1994), Education Reform: A Critical and Post-Structural Approach, Open University Press, Philadelphia, PA.
7. Ball, S.J. (1999), “Global trends in educational reform and the struggle for the soul of the teacher!”, paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference University of Sussex, Bringhton, September.
8. Ball, S.J. (2006), Education Policy and Social Class: Selected Works, Routledge, London.
9. Ball, S.J. (2008), The Education Debate, The Policy Press, Bristol.
10. Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P.A. and Harvey, J.A. (2003), Distributed Leadership: A Review of Literature, National College for School Leadership, Nottingham.
11. Berman, P. and McLaughlin, M.W. (1977), Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change: Factors Affecting Implementation and Continuation, RAND, Santa Monica, CA.
12. Booher-Jennings, J. (2006), “Rationing education in an era of accountability”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 87 No. 10, pp. 756-61.
13. Broadbent, J., Jacobs, K. and Laughlin, R. (1999), “Comparing schools in the UK and New Zealand: individualizing and socializing accountabilities and some implications for management control”, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 339-61.
14. Bryk, A.S. and Schneider, B. (1996), “Social trust: a moral resource for school improvement”, paper presented at the 1996 Meeting of the American Sociological Society, Washington, DC.
15. Bullard, P. and Taylor, B.O. (1994), Keepers of the Dream: The Triumph of Effective Schools, Excelsior Foundation, Chicago, IL.
16. Burch, P. (2009), Hidden Markets: The New Education Privatization, Routledge, New York, NY.
17. Burgess, S., Wilson, D. and Worth, J. (2010), A Natural Experiment in School Accountability: The Impact of School Performance Information on Pupil Progress and Sorting, Centre for Market and Public Organisation, Bristol Institute of Public Affairs, Bristol.
18. Camburn, E., Rowan, B. and Taylor, J.E. (2003), “Distributed leadership in schools: the case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 347-73.
19. Clotfelter, C.T. and Ladd, H.F. (1996), “Recognizing and rewarding success in public schools”, in Ladd, H.F. (Ed.), Holding Schools Accountable: Performance-Based Reform in Education, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, pp. 23-64.
20. Coburn, C.E. (2001), “Collective sensemaking about reading: how teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 145-70.
21. Cohen, D.K. (1982), “Policy and organization: the impact of state and federal educational policy on school governance”, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 474-99.
22. Cohen, D.K. (1988), Teaching Practice: Plus ça Change, National Center for Research on Teacher Education, East Lansing, MI.
23. Cohen, D.K. (1990), “A revolution in one classroom: the case of Mrs. Oublier”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 311-29.
24. Cohen, D.K. and Moffitt, S.L. (2009), The Ordeal of Equality: Did Federal Regulation Fix the Schools?, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
25. Cohen, D.K. and Spillane, J.P. (1994), “National education indicators and traditions of accountability”, in OECD (Ed.), Making Education Count: Developing and Using International Indicators, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, Paris, pp. 323-37.
26. Cohen, D.K. and Weiss, J.A. (1993), “The interplay of social science and prior knowledge in public policy”, in Redner, H. (Ed.), Studies in the Thought of Charles E. Lindblom, Westview, Boulder, CO, pp. 210-34.
27. Colyvas, J.A. (2012), “Performance metrics as formal structures and through the lens of social mechanisms: when do they work and how do they influence?”, American Journal of Education, Vol. 118 No. 2, pp. 167-97.
28. Confrey, J. and Stohl, V. (2004), On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12 Mathematics Evaluations, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
29. Copland, M.A. (2001), “The myth of the superprincipal”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 82 No. 7, pp. 528-33.
30. Cuban, L. (1988), The Managerial Imperative and the Practice of Leadership in Schools, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
31. Cullen, J.B. and Reback, R. (2006), “Tinkering toward accolades: school gaming under a performance accountability system”, Advances in Applied Microeconomics, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-34.
32. Darling-Hammond, L. (2004), “Standards, accountability, and school reform”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 106 No. 6, pp. 1047-85.
33. Darling-Hammond, L. and Wise, A.E. (1985), “Beyond standardization: state standards and school improvement”, The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 85 No. 3, pp. 315-36.
34. Davies, S. and Guppy, N. (1997), “Globalization and educational reforms in Anglo-American democracies”, Comparative Education Review, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 435-59.
35. Day, C. (2005), “Principals who sustain success: making a difference in schools in challenging circumstances”, International Journal of Leadership in Education, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 273-90.
36. Deal, T.E. and Celotti, L.D. (1980), “How much influence do (and can) educational administrators have on classrooms?”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 67 No. 7, pp. 471-3.
37. Diamond, J.B. and Spillane, J.P. (2004), “High stakes accountability in urban elementary schools: challenging or reproducing inequality?”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 106 No. 6, pp. 1145-76.
38. Espeland, W.N. and Sauder, M. (2007), “Rankings and reactivity: how public measures recreate social worlds”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 113 No. 1, pp. 1-40.
39. Eubanks, E.E. and Levine, D.U. (1983), “A first look at effective schools projects in New York City and Milwaukee”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 64 No. 10, pp. 697-702.
40. Figlio, D.N. and Getzler, L.S. (2002), Accountability, Ability and Disability: Gaming the System, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
41. Firestone, W.A. (1985), “The study of loose coupling: problems, progress, and prospects”, in Kerckhoff, A. (Ed.), Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization, Vol. 5, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 3-30.
42. Firestone, W.A. (1989), “Using reform: conceptualizing district initiative”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 151-64.
43. Firestone, W.A., Mayrowetz, D. and Fairman, J. (1998), “Performance-based assessment and instructional change: the effects of testing in Maine and Maryland”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 95-113.
44. Fuhrman, S.H. and Elmore, R.F. (1990), “Understanding local control in the wake of state educational reform”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 82-96.
45. Fuhrman, S.H. and Elmore, R.F. (2004), Redesigning Accountability Systems for Education, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
46. Fuhrman, S.H., Goertz, M.E. and Weinbaum, E.H. (2007), “Educational governance in the United States: where are we? How did we get here? Why should we care?”, in Cohen, D.K., Fuhrman, S. and Mosher, F. (Eds), The State of Education Policy Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 41-61.
47. Gamoran, A. and Dreeben, R. (1986), “Coupling and control in educational organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 612-32.
48. Gronn, P. (2000), “Distributed properties: a new architecture for leadership”, Educational Management Administration Leadership, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 317-38.
49. Hallett, T. (2007), “Between deference and distinction: interaction ritual through symbolic power in an educational institution”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 70 No. 2, pp. 148-71.
50. Hallinger, P. and Murphy, J.F. (1986), “The social context of effective schools”, American Journal of Education, Vol. 94 No. 3, pp. 328-55.
51. Hargreaves, A. and Fink, D. (2004), “The seven principles of sustainable leadership”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 61 No. 7, pp. 8-13.
52. Harris, A. (2002), “Effective leadership in schools facing challenging contexts”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 15-26.
53. Harris, A. (2005), “Distributed leadership”, in Davies, B. (Ed.), The Essentials of School Leadership, Paul Chapman Publishing, London, pp. 160-72.
54. Hatch, T. (2001), “Incoherence in the system: three perspectives on the implementation of multiple initiatives in one district”, American Journal of Education, Vol. 109 No. 4, pp. 407-37.
55. Herman, J.L. (2004), “The effects of testing on instruction”, in Fuhrman, S.H. and Elmore, R.F. (Eds), Redesigning Accountability Systems for Education, Teachers College Press, New York, NY, pp. 141-66.
56. Hill, H.C. (2007), “Learning in the teaching workforce”, The Future of Children, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 111-27.
57. Honig, M. (2003), “Building policy from practice: central office administrators’ roles and capacity in collaborative education policy implementation”, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 292-338.
58. Honig, M. (2006), New Directions in Education Policy Implementation: Confronting Complexity, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
59. Jacob, B.A. (2005), “Accountability, incentives and behavior: the impact of high-stakes testing in the Chicago Public Schools”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 89 Nos 5-6, pp. 761-96.
60. Kraatz, M.S. (2009), “Leadership as institutional work: a bridge to the other side”, in Lawrence, T.B., Suddaby, R. and Leca, B. (Eds), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 59-91.
61. Kraatz, M.S. and Block, E.S. (2008), “Organizational implications of institutional pluralism”, in Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R. and Sahlin-Andersson, K. (Eds), Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, Sage Publications, London, pp. 243-75.
62. Ladd, H.F. and Zelli, A. (2002), “School-based accountability in North Carolina: the responses of school principals”, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 494-529.
63. Lauen, D.L. and Gaddis, S.M. (2012), “Shining a light or fumbling in the dark? The effects of NCLB's subgroup-specific accountability on student achievement”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 185-208.
64. Lee, C.D. (2007), Culture, Literacy, and Learning: Taking Bloom in the Midst of the Whirlwind, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
65. Leithwood, K.A., Jantzi, D. and Steinbach, R. (1999), Changing Leadership for Changing Times, Open University Press, Buckingham.
66. Leithwood, K., Louis, K.S., Anderson, S. and Wahlstrom, K. (2004), How Leadership Influences Student Learning: A Review of Research for the Learning from Leadership Project, The Wallace Foundation, New York, NY.
67. Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N. and Yashkina, A. (2007), “Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: taking the ego out of the system”, Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 37-67.
68. Lewicki, R.J. and Bunker, B.B. (1996), “Developing and maintaining trust in work relationship”, in Kramer, R.M. and Tyler, T.R. (Eds), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 114-39.
69. Lindblom, C.E. (1977), Politics and Markets: The World's Political Economic Systems, Basic Books, New York, NY.
70. Lipman, P. (2004), High Stakes Education: Inequality, Globalization, and Urban School Reform, RoutledgeFalmer, New York, NY.
71. Lipsky, M. (1980), Street-Level Bureaucracy, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY.
72. Lortie, D.C. (1975), Schoolteacher, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
73. Louis, K.S., Kruse, S.D. and Bryk, A.S. (1995), “Professionalism and community: what is it and why is it important in urban schools?”, in Louis, K.S. and Kruse, S.D. (Eds), Professionalism and Community: Perspectives on Reforming Urban Schools, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 3-22.
74. Louis, K.S., Leithwood, K.A., Wahlstrom, K., Anderson, S.E., Michlin, M., Mascall, B., Gordon, M., Strauss, T., Thomas, E. and Moore, S. (2010), Learning from Leadership: Investigating the Links to Improved Student Learning, The Wallace Foundation, New York, NY.
75. McLaughlin, M.W. (1990), “The Rand change agent study revisited: macro perspectives and micro realities”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 19 No. 9, pp. 11-6.
76. McLaughlin, M.W. and Talbert, J.E. (2001), Professional Communities and the Work of High School Teaching, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
77. McNeil, L.M. (2002), “Private asset or public good: education and democracy at the crossroads”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 243-8.
78. MacBeath, J., Oduro, G.K.T. and Waterhouse, J. (2004), Distributed Leadership in Action: A Study of Current Practice in Schools, National College for School Leadership, Nottingham.
79. Malen, B. and Ogawa, R.T. (1988), “Professional-patron influence on site-based governance councils: a confounding case study”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 251-70.
80. Malen, B., Ogawa, R.T. and Kranz, J. (1990), “What do we know about school-based management? A case study of the literature – a call for research”, in Clune, W.H. (Ed.), Choice and Control in American Educations: Vol. 2. The Practice of Choice, Decentralization and School Restructuring, Falmer, London, pp. 289-342.
81. Mead, G.H. (1934), Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
82. Mehta, J. “The penetration of technocratic logic into the educational field: rationalizing schooling from the progressives to the present”, Teachers College Record, (revise and resubmited).
83. Mehta, J. “How paradigms create politics: the transformation of American educational policy 1980-2001”, American Educational Research Journal, (under review).
84. Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1978), “The structure of educational organizations”, in Meyer, M.W. (Ed.), Environments and Organizations, Vols 78-109, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
85. Meyer, J.W., Scott, W.R. and Strang, D. (1987), “Centralization, fragmentation, and school district complexity”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 186-201.
86. Mintrop, H. (2003), “The limits of sanctions in low-performing schools: a study of Maryland and Kentucky schools on probation”, Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 1-30.
87. Mintrop, H. and Sunderman, G.L. (2009), “Predictable failure of federal sanctions-driven accountability from school improvement – and why we may retain it anyway”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 353-64.
88. Mishra, A.K. (1996), “Organizational responses to crisis: the centrality of trust”, in Kramer, R.M. and Tyler, T.R. (Eds), Trust in Organizations, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 261-87.
89. Moolenaar, N.M., Daly, A.J. and Sleegers, P.J.C. (2011), “Ties with potential: social network structure and innovative climate in Dutch schools”, Teachers College Record, Vol. 113 No. 9, pp. 1983-2017.
90. National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983), A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform, United States Department of Education, Washington, DC.
91. Neal, D.A. and Schanzenbach, D. (2007), Left Behind by Design: Proficiency Counts and Test-Based Accountability, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
92. Ng, P.T. (2010), “The evolution and nature of school accountability in the Singapore education system”, Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 275-92.
93. Nichols, S.L. and Berliner, D.C. (2007), Collateral Damage: How High-Stakes Testing Corrupts America's Schools, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
94. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) (2001), in 20 U.S.C. § 9101, Vol. 20 U.S.C. § 9101.
95. Notman, R. and Henry, D.A. (2011), “Building and sustaining successful school leadership in New Zealand”, Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 375-94.
96. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2004), Learning for Tomorrow's World: First Results from PISA 2003, OECD, Paris.
97. Pipho, C. (1978), “Minimum competency testing in 1978: a look at state standards”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 59 No. 9, pp. 585-8.
98. Portin, B., Schneider, P., DeArmond, M. and Gundlach, L. (2003), Making Sense of Leading Schools: A Study of the School Principalship, Center on Reinventing Public Education, Washington University, Seattle, WA.
99. Power, M. (1994), “The audit society”, in Hopwood, A.G. and Miller, P.M. (Eds), Accounting as Social and Institutional Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 299-316.
100. Purkey, S.C. and Smith, M.S. (1985), “School reform: the district policy implications of the effective schools literature”, The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 85 No. 3, pp. 353-89.
101. Ranson, S. (1994), Towards the Learning Society, Cassell, London.
102. Robinson, V.M.J. and Timperley, H.S. (2000), “The link between accountability and improvement: the case of reporting to parents”, Peabody Journal of Education, Vol. 75 No. 4, pp. 66-89.
103. Rowan, B. (1982), “Organizational structure and the institutional environment: the case of public schools”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 259-79.
104. Rowan, B. and Miskel, C.G. (1999), “Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations”, in Murphy, J. and Louis, K.S. (Eds), Handbook of Research in Educational Administration, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 350-84.
105. Selznick, P. (1992), The Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and the Promise of Community, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
106. Sleegers, P.J.C., Geijsel, F.P. and van den Berg, R.M. (2002), “Conditions fostering educational change”, in Leithwood, K.A. and Hallinger, P. (Eds), Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 75-102.
107. Smith, B. (1998), It's About Time: Opportunities to Learn in Chicago's Elementary Schools, Consortium on Chicago School Research, Chicago, IL.
108. Smith, M.S. and O'Day, J. (1990), “Systemic school reform”, in Fuhrman, S.H. and Malen, B. (Eds), The Politics of Curriculum and Testing: Yearbook of the Politics of Education Association, Falmer Press, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 233-67.
109. Spillane, J.P. (1994), “How districts mediate between state policy and teachers’ practice”, in Elmore, R.F. and Fuhrman, S.H. (Eds), The Governance of Curriculum, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA, pp. 167-85.
110. Spillane, J.P. (1996), “School districts matter: local educational authorities and state instructional policy”, Educational Policy, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 63-87.
111. Spillane, J.P. (1998), “State policy and the non-monolithic nature of the local school district: organizational and professional considerations”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 33-63.
112. Spillane, J.P. (2004), Standards Deviation: How Local Schools Misunderstand Policy, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
113. Spillane, J.P. (2006), Distributed Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
114. Spillane, J.P. and Anderson, L.M. (under review), “Policy in practice: school administrative practice & policy implementation.
115. Spillane, J.P. and Diamond, J.B. (2007), Distributed Leadership in Practice, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
116. Spillane, J.P. and Hunt, B. (2010), “Days of their lives: a mixed-methods, descriptive analysis of the men and women at work in the principal's office”, Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 293-331.
117. Spillane, J.P. and Kim, C.M. (under review), “Organizing for instruction: instructional advice and information seeking in elementary schools for mathematics and English Language Arts”, American Journal of Education.
118. Spillane, J.P., Camburn, E.M. and Pareja, A.S. (2007), “Taking a distributed perspective to the school principal's workday”, Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 103-25.
119. Spillane, J.P., Parise, L.M. and Sherer, J.Z. (2011), “Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: policy, school administration, and the technical core”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 586-620.
120. Spillane, J.P., Diamond, J.B., Sherer, J. and Coldren, A.F. (2004), “Distributing leadership”, in Coles, M. and Southworth, G. (Eds), Developing Leadership: Creating the Schools of Tomorrow, Open University Press, New York, NY, pp. 37-49.
121. Spillane, J.P., Diamond, J.B., Burch, P., Hallett, T., Jita, L. and Zoltners, J. (2002), “Managing in the middle: school leaders and the enactment of accountability policy”, Educational Policy, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 731-62.
122. Strathern, M. (Ed.) (2000), Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy, Routledge, New York, NY.
123. Timperley, H.S. (2005), “Distributed leadership: developing theory from practice”, Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 395-420.
124. Tomlinson, S. (2001), Education in a Post-Welfare Society, Open University Press, Buckingham.
125. Tyack, D. and Tobin, W. (1994), “The ‘grammar’ of school: why has it been so hard to change?”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 453-79.
126. Valenzuela, A. (Ed.) (2004), Leaving Children Behind, How “Texas-Style” Accountability Fails Latino Youth, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
127. Valli, L. and Buese, D. (2007), “The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes accountability”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 519-58.
128. Weick, K.E. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organizing, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
129. Whitty, G. and Power, S. (2003), “Making sense of education reform: global and national influences”, in Torres, C.A. and Antikainen, A. (Eds), International Handbook on the Sociology of Education, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, pp. 305-24.
130. Wilson, S.M. and Floden, R.E. (2001), “Hedging bets: standards-based reform in classrooms”, in Fuhrman, S.H. (Ed.), From the Capitol to the Classroom: Standards-Based Reform in the States, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 193-216.
131. Wong, M., Cook, T.D. and Steiner, P.M. (2009), An Evaluation of No Child Left Behind Using Short Interrupted Time-Series Analyses with Non-Equivalent Comparison Groups, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.