Knuckling Under? School Superintendents and Accountability-Based Educational Reform

The goal of this article is to explore the various ways that superintendents have responded to accountability-based educational reform efforts such as No Child Left Behind, the factors that have influenced their responses, and the implications of these responses for current and future educational leaders. With respect to the first issue, empirical data from a number of nationai studies (T. E. Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Johnson, Arumi, & Ott, 2006; Johnstone, Dilkkers, & Luedeke, 2009; Stecher et al., 2008) make clear that while there have been a variety of responses from superintendents to accountability-based reform efforts, superintendents have mostly played a supportive role. Examining the situation more fully suggests that the driving factors behind superintendent support for accountability-based educational reform are complex and are often deeply embedded within the "DNA" of the role of superintendent. This article examines the structure of this DNA by looking at the factors that influence superintendents' views of accountability-based educational reform from historical, political, and institutional perspectives. This muitifaceted approach provides new insights into the complex relationship that exists between the structure of the role of superintendent and the agency of the individuals who inhabit that role.

The Politics of Accountability and Teacher Preparation: A Case Study from Pennsylvania

In an effort to understand some of the ways that accountability-based reform efforts have influenced teacher education, this article details the politics of accountability in Pennsylvania that motivated sweeping changes in the policies governing teacher preparation in 2006. This case study provides a poignant example of the kind of complex accountability systems now being constructed across the United States in an effort to change teacher preparation. By analyzing primary documents including the legal statutes governing teacher preparation in Pennsylvania, correspondence from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, related newsletters, memos, reports, transcripts of meetings, and testimony before the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, the complex nature of the conflicts underlying the development and implementation of teacher education reform is brought into focus. The study's findings suggest that a deep and uncritical acceptance of accountability-based teacher education reform on the part of educational policy makers is likely to do more harm than good. The article concludes by outlining a framework for developing more intelligent measures of accountability that might preserve professional autonomy and judgment.

The Politics of Accountability and Teacher Preparation

In an effort to understand some of the ways that accountability-based reform efforts have influenced teacher education, this article details the politics of accountability in Pennsylvania that motivated sweeping changes in the policies governing teacher preparation in 2006. This case study provides a poignant example of the kind of complex accountability systems now being constructed across the United States in an effort to change teacher preparation. By analyzing primary documents including the legal statutes governing teacher preparation in Pennsylvania, correspondence from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, related newsletters, memos, reports, transcripts of meetings, and testimony before the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, the complex nature of the conflicts underlying the development and implementation of teacher education reform is brought into focus. The study's findings suggest that a deep and uncritical acceptance of accountability-based teacher education reform on the part of educational policy makers is likely to do more harm than good. The article concludes by outlining a framework for developing more intelligent measures of accountability that might preserve professional autonomy and judgment.