The edge of chaos. School administrators and accountability
| Pages | 55-77 |
| Published date | 01 February 2004 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230410517477 |
| Date | 01 February 2004 |
| Author | Anthony H. Normore |
| Subject Matter | Education |
The edge of chaos
School administrators and accountability
Anthony H. Normore
College of Education, Florida International University,
Miami, Florida, USA
Keywords North America, Leadership, Public schools, Expectation
Abstract Much has been written about student accountability, teacher accountability, and school
accountability. More limited research is available on administrator accountability. Recently there
have been substantial initiatives undertaken world-wide to increase educational accountability.
With increasing demands and changing expectations in the role of school administration,
researchers, practitioners and policy makers and departments of education have become socially
preoccupied with educational accountability. The purpose of this article is to provide a
comprehensive literature review on accountability of school administrators over the last two
decades to demonstrate how aspiring, new and practicing school administrators understand and
meet the demands of accountability in a time of tumultuous change when the stakes are high.
Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men
who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for thatwould be of no
advantage to you (Paul, Letters to the Hebrews, chapter 17).
Introduction
The above quote is an indication of how long accountability has been on the
books. No single date can be pinpointed as the onset of serious thinking about
how accountability should be structured and managed in organizations.
However, the roots are deeply ingrained in earlier eras that date back to the Old
Testament. In the book of Exodus, chapter 18, Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law,
chastises Moses for failing to establish an accountability system through which
he could delegate responsibilities for the administration of justice. In verse 25,
Moses accepts Jethro’s advice and “chose able men out of all Israel and made
them heads over thousands”. Moses continued to judge the “hard cases”, but
his rulers judged “every small matter” themselves (Shafritz and Ott, 2001, p. 28).
Socrates explains to Nicomachides that a responsible leader who “knows
what he needs, and is able to provide it, can be a good president, whether he
have the direction of a chorus, a family, a city, or an army” (Xenophon, 1869, as
cited in Shafritz and Ott, 2001, p. 35). For thousands of years accountability has
continued to surface in formal and informal organizations. Shafritz and Ott
(2001) assert that there are countless examples of accountability systems in the
arena of organizational theory, from the classicalist era (pre-Second World
War; Fayol, 1916; Taylor, 1916; Weber, 1922) to the the neoclassicalists (post
Second World War; McGregor, 1959; Merton, 1957; Selznick, 1948; Simon, 1946)
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
The edge of
chaos
55
Received April 2003
Revised July 2003
Accepted July 2003
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 42 No. 1, 2004
pp. 55-77
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/09578230410517477
to the postmodern era and the information age (Fulk and DeSanctis, 1993;
Hammer and Champy, 1993; Senge, 1990).
More recently there have been substantial initiatives undertaken world-wide
to increase educational accountability (Abelmann et al., 1999; Adams and Kirst,
1999; Banfield, 1992; AWSP, 2000; Becher et al., 1983; Black, 1994; Blase
´, 1997;
Butterworth and Butterworth, 1998; Chubb and Moe, 1990; Earl, 1995, 1998;
Eisner, 1991; Fagan, 1995; Gaines and Cornett, 1992; IEL, 2000; Kogan, 1986;
Leithwood et al., 1999; Milne, 1995; Wagner, 1989; Watts et al., 1998). Much has
been written about student accountability, teacher accountability, and school
accountability (Ladd, 1996). More limited research is available on administrator
accountability (ERS, 1996; ISLLC, 1996).
Twenty years after the landmark report A Nation at Risk, education has
made some progress but it has been heart-breakingly slow (Feldman, 2003).
When the report first appeared, many education organizations went on the
defensive (NCEE, 1983). Although the American Federation of Teachers
disagreed with much the report said, the federation agreed that the report
certainly warranted the attention and support for needed changes in education
(Feldman, 2003). According to Feldman (2003), the criticisms and
recommendations of A Nation at Risk prompted many of the subsequent
efforts. Of course, not all the reforms have been responsive or particularly
helpful, and they have been inconsistent, ranging from changes in graduation
requirements to structural changes like site-based management and more
radical experiments like charter schools, vouchers and private management of
schools.
Most notably, beginning in the 1990s, the standards movement , a
development of A Nation at Risk’s call for high expectations and goals for
all learners, sought to raise achievement by instituting a system of standards
for what students should know, curriculum to embody the standards, and the
assessments to test how well students meet the standards. Forty-nine states
now have content standards for most subjects and assessments to measure
student achievement, though curriculum and assessment quality are still weak
points in most states according to Feldman (2003). With this in mind it becomes
increasingly important to understand the roles of school administrators in
making schools effective. With increasing demands and changing expectations
in the role of school administration, researchers, practitioners and policy
makers have become socially preoccupied with education accountability.
DeWittWallace Readers Digest (2003) asserts that one of the reasons for slow
progress is due to the poor quality of leadership, a vital ingredient in achieving
system-wide, education renewal. It begs to question then why this arena has
gotten scant attention. With nearly half the nation’s superintendents expected
to retire or leave their jobs in the next five years and three-fifths of all districts
reporting an inability to attract enough quality candidates for vacant
principalships, how can school leaders be held more accountable than ever for
JEA
42,1
56
To continue reading
Request your trial