No abstract

No abstract

Policy makers have initiated a dramatic period of standards-based reform for New York State students, an effort of great relevance across the United States. Although comprehensive high school examinations and state-endorsed Regents diplomas are over 100 years old, the demand that all students must earn college-preparatory diplomas is new. This research asked under what conditions district context matters in implementing of standards-based reform. The authors posited that personnel (teachers, principals, and superintendents) interact with the contextual characteristics of their district environments (organizational size, geography, resources, personnel level) in ways that shape responses to standards-based reforms. Surveys and state-collected data, along with multilevel modeling, were used to weigh programmatic reform at the school district level. Districts serving greater proportions of poor students were more likely to offer general equivalency diploma alternatives to the Regents diploma. Whether these phenomena undermine the heightened standards for all children or reflect healthy local variation and choice is debatable.

We examine changes in the use of nontax revenues for education finance from 1991 to 2010. Beyond the summary of usage over time, we ask whether nontraditional revenues like fees accentuate or mitigate the impact of downturns. More generally, we examine the extent to which school districts have responded to fiscal pressures by turning to nontax revenues. We also document the extent to which the use of nontax revenues varies across districts according to student poverty status. We show that alternative revenues continue to be a small source of local revenues and have increased quite little since the early 1990s. There was at most a minimal shift to nontax revenues in downturns, though there is evidence of greater use of these revenues among school districts facing more permanent fiscal pressures like tax limits. Differential access to fee revenues and other alternative revenues during downturns may slightly accentuate inequities in K–12 education spending.

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to report on a six‐year self‐study of a doctoral training program intended to promote social justice leadership via an “ethic of care” framework.Design/methodology/approachThe primary data set utilized was an open‐ended survey completed by doctoral students after finishing core course requirements. Data analysis included a thematic analysis of 110 respondents which examined variation in students' understanding and application of issues associated with equity, justice, and diversity, as well as the ethic of care. As a collaborative self‐study the data analysis involved procedures of open, independent, and collaborative coding, as well as peer debriefing.FindingsSuggests that the doctoral program has been effective at creating a caring environment and changing students' understanding of diversity and equity issues. Two programmatic weaknesses were uncovered; a lack of curricular integration and student perceptions of social justice and diversity as discrete concepts. Students reported that diversity discussions and readings were centered in one class, suggesting that this lack of integration may marginalize these issues. These weaknesses are explored using the concepts of “caring” and “colorblind” curriculums.Research limitations/implicationsReports on a self‐study of one unique program; the findings may not be generalizable to other programs. Additionally, it suggests that leadership preparation programs should attend to how the issue of colorblindness may permeate curricula, structure the classroom environment, and shape interactions with students.Originality/valueThis paper is among the first to evaluate the potential for colorblindness in the “ethic of care” as related to supporting social justice leadership in a doctoral preparation program.