Debate over the closure of DeVasco High School shows that data-driven accountability was a methodological and administrative processes that produced both transparency and opacity. Data, when applied to a system of accountability, produced new capabilities and powers, and as such were political. It created second-hand representations of important objects of analysis. Using these representations administrators spoke on behalf of the school, the student and the classroom, without having to rely on the first-person accounts of students, teachers or principals. They empowered one group-central city administrators-over another-teachers and principals. After analyzing the form these policies took, this article concludes that it is necessary to rethink the processes that create visibility and invisibility. Public data obscured the voices, experiences and collective traumas of students and faculty within the school. A narrow focus on activities within the schools rendered invisible the structural decisions made by the Department of Education in New York City-to favor small schools over large, comprehensive ones. In order to create understanding, and a sense of common purpose, those who are spoken for in simplified data must also be given the opportunity to debate the representations of their performance and quality.

No abstract

No abstract

feel it, under a certain modification of circumstances, a most agreeable and congenial occupation of his time, to be employed in establishing a better practice in the management of Woods, Plantations, &c. he is not in a position fb be so disinterested as altogether to lose sight of his own interest in the matter.Further: while he feels it to be an object of vast importance to the great body of Landed Proprietors, and others, that a new system should be J|dd down and acted upon, the Author wishes not to disguise the fact, that he seeks the honourable distinction of being permitted to assist in correcting the evils, which he thinks he may have been the first so strongly to point out.The Author cannot but hope that he has proved all that can be fairly considered as implied in his Title ; and if he have done so, it may be productive of much advantage to those who possess property in Woods, &c.: their attention being PREFACE.Vll once strongly called to the siibject, they cannot fail to perceive that there is plenty for them to do.The Author needs not to be told, for of that he is quite conscious that his book is very defective in arrangement, and faulty in style, but if he have succeeded in the attempt to be tolerably "plain and perspicuous," and "not very ungrammatical," that is as much, perhaps, as ought to be required of a practical man. One word is necessary here, with reference to Sir H. Steuart, whos^e name, as a Planter, the Author has mentioned at page 58. He wishes to correct an impression which he may have produced, that the honourable Baronet is altogether opposed to the practice of preparing the soil previous to planting. This is not the case ; but Sir Henry, with singular inconsistency, after speaking in the highest terms in favour of trenching, manuring, &c, declares the practice to be inapplicable Vlll PREFACE. to Plantations on a large scale. It is unnecessary to remark here, that on this point the Author is of a different opinion. P. S. The Author reviews neglected Woods, Plantations, &c. and gives directions for their proper management, or he would contract with any Noblemen or Gentlemen to overlook their Woods, &c. at so much per acre per year.

No abstract