Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Principals, Shared Decision Making, and School Reform

Principals, Shared Decision Making, and School Reform When schools adopt shared decision making (SDM), principals' authority is limited. Nevertheless, all six principals in the SDM high schools we studied supported SDM, at least in part because they had chosen to serve in an SDM school. The three principals who were most supportive of SDM also had ambitious visions of instructional reform. After 1.5 to 2 years, the high schools in which these principals served experienced a heightened level of conflict among the faculty. In large part, the conflict was due to these principals' efforts to use SDM as a vehicle to foster large changes. Teachers resisted major change, and principals became impatient with the participatory process and tried to promote their own versions of reform. Only a modest degree of reform was achieved, but it was more than was achieved by SDM principals without a reform agenda. Reformist principals in non-SDM high schools implemented modest reforms as well, although at the expense of suspicion and antagonism after changes were introduced. We explore the dilemmas that reformist principals face and suggest policy implications. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis SAGE

Principals, Shared Decision Making, and School Reform

Download PDF
15 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/sage/principals-shared-decision-making-and-school-reform-4RIm0GLQMf

References (28)

Publisher
SAGE
Copyright
Copyright © by SAGE Publications
ISSN
0162-3737
eISSN
1935-1062
DOI
10.3102/01623737016003287
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

When schools adopt shared decision making (SDM), principals' authority is limited. Nevertheless, all six principals in the SDM high schools we studied supported SDM, at least in part because they had chosen to serve in an SDM school. The three principals who were most supportive of SDM also had ambitious visions of instructional reform. After 1.5 to 2 years, the high schools in which these principals served experienced a heightened level of conflict among the faculty. In large part, the conflict was due to these principals' efforts to use SDM as a vehicle to foster large changes. Teachers resisted major change, and principals became impatient with the participatory process and tried to promote their own versions of reform. Only a modest degree of reform was achieved, but it was more than was achieved by SDM principals without a reform agenda. Reformist principals in non-SDM high schools implemented modest reforms as well, although at the expense of suspicion and antagonism after changes were introduced. We explore the dilemmas that reformist principals face and suggest policy implications.

Journal

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis – SAGE

Published: Sep 1, 1994

There are no references for this article.