Deciding Who Decides Questions at the Intersection of School Finance Reform Litigation and Standards-Based Accountability Policies

Abstract

Courts hearing school finance reform cases have recently begun to consider several issues related to standards-based accountability policies. This convergence of school finance reform litigation and standards-based accountability policies represents a chance for the courts to reallocate decision-making authority for each type of reform across the governmental branches. Using an institutional choice approach, this study analyzes how judges in two school finance cases reallocated governmental decision-making authority. This study further highlights the historical and legal factors underlying this reallocation and suggests that this reallocation may represent a desirable new approach for dealing with educational policy problems in an evenhanded way.

Using the 2006 PISA Questionaire to Evaluate the Measure of Educational Resources: A Rasch Measurement Approach

“…The alignment between accountability policies and school finance policies to better serve student learning goals has been emphasized by educational researchers (Superfine, 2009). Findings of this study can contribute to the future research on the effects of school educational resources on student academic achievement.…”

The Effects of Content Organization and Curriculum Implementation on Students' Mathematics Learning in Second-Year High School Courses

“…With respect to experience, there is evidence that some beginning teachers rely more heavily on mathematics textbooks than more experienced teachers, who draw on their own experiences when planning and implementing instruction (Remillard & Bryans, 2004;Tarr, Chávez, Reys, & Reys, 2006). In fact, there is evidence that more experienced teachers may be resistant to key features of recent reform curricula and instead revert to the use of conventional textbooks with which they are more accustomed to teaching (Remillard & Bryans, 2004;Superfine, 2009). Similarly, teachers are more likely to follow the curriculum when their beliefs align with the pedagogical orientation of the program (Remillard & Bryans, 2004;Stein & Kaufman, 2010;Stein, Remillard, & Smith, 2007); when teachers' beliefs are in conflict with underlying program theory, they may be resistant to using the curricular materials (Bowzer, 2008;Chávez, 2003).…”

The Politics of K–12 Local Control Funding and Accountability for Latinx and ELL Students: Lessons Learned From California

“…Using the politics of education as our overarching theme, this issue examines California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and interrogates the ways in which policy directives and implementation practices reconstitute structural forms of oppression. These contributions have pushed the boundaries of how we critically analyze topics such as the symbolic elements of educational policy; policy formation; interest group politics; racial politics, power relations and the persistent disenfranchisement of minoritized communities; school governance; and political economy and marketization of public education (see, for example, Abu El-Haj, 2006;Alemán, 2006;Ball, 1991;Dumas, Dixon, & Mayorga, 2016;Fisher, 2003;Honig, 2006;López, 2003López, , 2012López, , 2016Melen, 1994;Marsh, 2007;Mazzoni, 1994;McDonnell, 2009;Mintrom, 2001;Rodriguez, 2013;Scott, 2011;Scott & Holme, 2016;Superfine, 2009;Trujillo, 2012;Werts & Brewer, 2015;Wells, Slayton, & Scott, 2002;Winton, 2010) to name a few. Although this special issue focuses on the California context, we believe that the California model has important implications for other states and federal policy.…”