Abstract
Most educational accountability systems draw upon relatively simplified indicators of student learning. Despite sufficient criticism and evidence of their misuse, test scores continue to be emphasized—even though they have a deadening effect on the very school district these accountability systems intend to primarily influence. This paper focuses on one of these low-performing school districts. The case study of Sylvan One reveals that the influence of state policy is especially circumscribed in a district like Sylvan's that is beset by such prevailing conditions as the politics of race, the culture of poverty, vacuums in communication and leadership, and the uncritical mass of human resources. Each of these conditions limits change and reform dramatically. Account-ability and reform must focus on a rigorous curriculum and well-understood standards—but only in the context of this community, replete with its problems ofrelationships, resources, andracism. These are the “three Rs” that are tantamount to creating and sustaining reform. And this approach is more about political development than anything else. Recommendations for moving beyond the traditional policymaking tools of mandates and inducements are suggested, recognizing that policy may at best promote equality, but not necessarily excellence and equity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berry, B., and Norton, J. (1995, Fall).School Reform in Long Beach. Atlanta, GA: The Focused Reporting Project.
Clark, D., and Astuto, T. (1994). Redirecting reform: Challenges to popular assumptions about teachers and students.Kappan, March, pp. 513–520.
Cuban, L. (1992). Curriculum stability and change. In Philip Jackson (ed.),Handbook of Research on Curriculum. New York: Macmillan.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1993a).Standards of Practice for Learner-Centered Schools. New York: National Center for Restructuring Education, Schools, and Teaching.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1993b).Professional Development Schools: Schools for Developing a Profession. New York: Teachers College Press.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1993c). Reframing the school reform agenda: Developing capacity for school transformation.Kappan, June, pp. 753–761.
Darling-Hammond, L., and Ascher, C. (1992).Creating Accountability in Big City Schools. New York: National Center for Restructuring Education, Schools, and Teaching.
Darling-Hammond, L., and Snyder, J. (1992). Curriculum inquiry. In Philip Jackson (ed.),Handbook of Research on Curriculum. New York: Macmillan.
Dornan, J., Jenkins, K., and Berry, B. (1995).Barriers to Reform. Greensboro, NC: Southeastern Regional Vision for Education.
Geertz, C. (1973).The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Green, T. F. (1983). Excellence, equity, and equality. In L. S. Shulman and G. S. Sykes (eds.),Handbook of Teaching and Policy. New York: Longman.
Lieberman, A., and McLaughlin, M. (1992). Networks for educational change: Powerful and problematic.Kappan. May, pp. 673–677.
Maslow, A. (1954).Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row.
McDonnell, L., and Elmore, R. (1991). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. In A. Odden (ed.),Education Policy Implementation. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Meyer, R. (1992). Education reform: What constitutes valid indicators of educational performance?The La Follette Policy Report, Spring, pp. 14–19.
Miles, M., and Huberman (1994).Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Oakes, J. (1989). What educational indicators? The case for assessing school context.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11(12): 181–199.
Odden, A. (1990). Educational indicators in the United States: The need for analysis.Educational Researcher, June–July, pp. 25–29.
Salganik, L. (1994). Apples and apples: Comparing performance indicators for places with similar demographic characteristics.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 16(2): 125–141.
Sarason, S. (1990).The Predictable Failure of Educational Reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shepard, L. (1991). Will national tests improve student learning.Kappan 73(3): 232–238.
Talbert, J., and McLaughlin, M. (1993). Understanding teaching in context. In D. Cohen et al. (eds.), Teaching for Understanding: Challenges for Policy and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wheelock, Anne (1995). School rewards, school, accountability, and school reform. Paper prepared for the Carnegie Task Force for Learning in the Primary Grades. New York.
Yin, R. (1984).Case Study Research: Design and Method. Beverly Hills: Sage
Yukl, G. (1994).Leadership in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Berry, B. Accountability, school reform, and equity: The troubling case of Sylvan school district. Urban Rev 28, 233–256 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02355339
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02355339