Critical analysis of accountability policy in alternative schools: implications for school leaders
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2012-0002 |
| Date | 09 August 2013 |
| Pages | 655-679 |
| Published date | 09 August 2013 |
| Author | Lynn M. Hemmer,Jean Madsen,Mario S. Torres |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Critical analysis of accountability
policy in alternative schools:
implications for school leaders
Lynn M. Hemmer
Department of Educational Leadership, Research, Curriculum and Instruction,
Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi, Texas, USA, and
Jean Madsen and Mario S. Torres
Department of Educational Administration, Texas A&M University,
College Station, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The expansion of alternative education, globally, has coincided with a shift towards
greater accountability for ensuring educational access and opportunity, high academic standards and
increased graduation rates. While studies suggest the pervasive influence of accountability may be
redefining how school leaders provide meaningful learning experiences and facilitating high
achievement, little is known about school leaders of alternative schools administering accountability
polices. If there are inconsistencies between meaningful learning experiences for at-risk students and
performance-based standards outcomes, this may suggest issues around equity and alternative
schools that should be evaluated. Using a theoretical frame of policy implementation, specifically the
authoritative design of policy and social constructs of compliance, this study aims to examine how
alternative school leaders implement accountability policies.
Design/methodology/approach – This cross-case study employs a qualitativethematic strateg y of
data analysis in conjunction with Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of discourse analysis to
examine how seven school leaders at five alternative schools in California and Texas interpret and
administer accountability policy.
Findings – The theme of reconciliation: tension between compliance and innovation was revealed
from the data. The discourses surrounding the nature of students at risk and policy compliance
converged, creating a notion that alternative school leaders were losing their autonomy as knowing
what is best for their students amidst increasing accountability standards.
Research limitations/implications – While many of the administrators are positioned by their
districts to act as an at-risk student expert when designing or sustaining academic and social
programs at their respective alternative schools, they are in the process of losing some of their
autonomy because of the pressures derived from accountability standards. However, school leaders
continue to take responsive and reflexive actions to create distance between their settings and
accountability policy in order to protect their students and schools from external pressures.
Originality/value – The study presents original findings in the area of accountability policy
implementation in alternative school settings. This work suggests that the social constr ucts of
compliance and student risk factors converge with the authoritative nature of accountability policy.
In turn, tension was created for alternative school le aders as they consider what is best for at-risk
students.
Keywords Policy implementation, Alternative education, School leaders, At-risk students,
Accountability, Education, Leaders, Students
Paper type Research p aper
Worldwide, interest in, and concern about, educational gaps between mino rity and
non-minority students, socio-economic disadvantages, poor access to education,
and problems relating to assimilatio n practices has spurred a greater variety of
educational options for children (MacKenzie, 2010). Against local, national, and global
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
Received 10 January 2012
Revised 11 April 2012
23 June 2012
Accepted 28 June 2012
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol.51 No.5, 2013
pp. 655-679
rEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-01-2012-0002
655
Analysis of
accountability
policy
backdrops, alternative schools play an increasingly important role in obtaining
educational goals of inclusiveness, relevancy, and democracy (Bryson, 2010; Kim and
Taylor, 2008; Orsos et al., 2001; Peled and Smith, 2010). Collectively, the concept
of alternative schools is an educational approach for children at risk of exclusion
from education. In the USA, and around the world, alternative education is a means to
transform educational experiences of marginalized, disenfranc hised youth so that
eventually they become contributing members to the social, economic, and political
structure of the country.
The expansion of alternative education, globally, has coincided with a shift
toward greater accountability for ensuring educational access an d opportunity, high
academic standards and increased graduation rates. Centralized accountability
systems were originally championed as a means to ensure every student had access to
the same high standards of learning (Diamond and Spillane, 2004; Mazzeo, 2001). In
theory, these accountability systems would not differentiate neighborhoods, schools,
or students, thus ensuring equit y and opportunity (Stecher et al., 2003). If held to
high standards and accountable for student performance, sc hools would encourage
across-the-board academic improvement, reduce achievement gaps (most prevalent
between non-minority and minority and wealthy and poor students), and increase
graduation rates (McSpadden McNeil et al., 2008).
Previous studies suggest the pervasive influence of accountability may be
redefining how school leaders of regular schools approach providing meaningful
learning experiences and facilitating high achievement (Cr um and Sherman, 2008;
Spillane et al., 2002a; Rutledge et al., 2010). However, less is known as to how school
leaders of alternative schools interpret and implement accountability policies. For this
reason, this research investigated how seven school administrators at five alternative
schools in the USA interpret and administer accountability policies. If there are
inconsistencies between meaningful learning exp eriences for at-risk students and
performance-based standards outcomes, this may suggest issues around equity
and alternative schools that should be evaluated. The results of this study may be used
to guide policy makers and practitioners in the development, interpretation, and
implementation of accountability policy for at-risk students. In addition, by examin ing
the intersection between policy compliance and social constructs, this study allows for
a deeper understanding of the role schools leaders have in impacting policy outcome.
This paper first presents an overview of alternative education in the USA. Along
with this overview, the researchers offera synopsis of accountability procedural issues
for alternative schools. Together, these overviews may serve as a starting point to
analyze how alternative school administrators conceptuali ze their role in educating at-
risk students in an era of accountability. Using a theoretical frame of policy
implementation, the researchers then synthesize how seven alter native school leaders
from California and Texas create meaning from accountability policy across the
educational process in their school (Cohen et al., 2007; Madsen, 1994; Pressman and
Wildavsky, 1973; Spillane et al., 2002b). By using this frame, the researchers were able
to apply general conditions of a school leader’s belief, attitude, and knowledge of equity
for his/her at-risk students as it relates to accountability policy.
Alternative schools in the USA
The prevalence of alternative schools in the USA is well documented (Kleiner
et al., 2002). Having first emerged during the progressive movement during the
1930s and 1940s, their popularity grew during the Civil Rights Era of the 1960s
656
JEA
51,5
To continue reading
Request your trial