Tight, Loose, or Decoupling? A National Study of the Decision-Making Power Relationship Between District Central Offices and School Principals

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Administration Quarterly Pub Date : 2020-08-01 DOI:10.1177/0013161X19851174
Jiangang Xia, Jianping Shen, Jingping Sun
{"title":"Tight, Loose, or Decoupling? A National Study of the Decision-Making Power Relationship Between District Central Offices and School Principals","authors":"Jiangang Xia, Jianping Shen, Jingping Sun","doi":"10.1177/0013161X19851174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Do school district central offices and school principals have the same level of influence on school decisions? What does the district–principal power relationship look like? These two questions are discussed but are rarely examined in the literature. Based on a nationally representative sample from the 2007-2008 Schools and Staffing Survey data, we explored these two questions. Specifically, we applied the paired samples t test to compare the district central offices’ and school principals’ influences and applied the multilevel modeling method to estimate the power relationship. We found that (a) on average, districts and principals had the same level of influence on establishing curriculum, whereas school principals had higher influence on the other six decision areas examined (performance standards, teachers’ professional development programs, evaluating teachers, hiring teachers, discipline policies, and school budget), and (b) a tight coupling power relationship between district central offices and school principals was identified for the three areas related to the technical core of schools (performance standards, establishing curriculum, and teachers’ professional development programs), a loose coupling power relationship was revealed for the personnel (hiring and evaluating teachers) and budget areas, while a decoupling power relationship was found for discipline policy decisions. Discussions and implications for school leadership and policy were included in this study.","PeriodicalId":48091,"journal":{"name":"Educational Administration Quarterly","volume":"56 1","pages":"396 - 434"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0013161X19851174","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Administration Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19851174","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Do school district central offices and school principals have the same level of influence on school decisions? What does the district–principal power relationship look like? These two questions are discussed but are rarely examined in the literature. Based on a nationally representative sample from the 2007-2008 Schools and Staffing Survey data, we explored these two questions. Specifically, we applied the paired samples t test to compare the district central offices’ and school principals’ influences and applied the multilevel modeling method to estimate the power relationship. We found that (a) on average, districts and principals had the same level of influence on establishing curriculum, whereas school principals had higher influence on the other six decision areas examined (performance standards, teachers’ professional development programs, evaluating teachers, hiring teachers, discipline policies, and school budget), and (b) a tight coupling power relationship between district central offices and school principals was identified for the three areas related to the technical core of schools (performance standards, establishing curriculum, and teachers’ professional development programs), a loose coupling power relationship was revealed for the personnel (hiring and evaluating teachers) and budget areas, while a decoupling power relationship was found for discipline policy decisions. Discussions and implications for school leadership and policy were included in this study.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
紧密、松散还是解耦?区委与校长决策权关系的全国性研究
学区中央办公室和校长对学校决策的影响力是否相同?地区-主体权力关系是什么样子的?这两个问题被讨论过,但在文献中很少被研究。基于2007-2008年学校和人员配置调查数据中具有全国代表性的样本,我们探讨了这两个问题。具体而言,我们应用配对样本t检验来比较地区中心办公室和学校校长的影响,并应用多层次建模方法来估计权力关系。我们发现(a)平均而言,地区和校长对课程设置的影响程度相同,而校长对其他六个决策领域(绩效标准、教师专业发展计划、评估教师、聘请教师、纪律政策和学校预算)的影响更大,(b)在与学校技术核心相关的三个领域(绩效标准、制定课程和教师专业发展计划),地区中心办公室和校长之间存在紧密耦合的权力关系,在人员(招聘和评估教师)和预算领域,则存在松耦合的权力联系,而纪律政策决策存在脱钩的权力关系。本研究包括了对学校领导和政策的讨论和影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Administration Quarterly
Educational Administration Quarterly EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Educational Administration Quarterly presents prominent empirical and conceptual articles focused on timely and critical leadership and policy issues of educational organizations. As an editorial team, we embrace traditional and emergent research paradigms, methods, and issues. We particularly promote the publication of rigorous and relevant scholarly work that enhances linkages among and utility for educational policy, practice, and research arenas.
期刊最新文献
“Fighting an Uphill Battle”: The Pursuit of Equity Through the Every Student Succeeds Act in North Carolina Preparing Early Education Leaders: An Analysis of UCEA Principal Preparation Programs Assessing the Psychometric Qualities of the Data-Informed School Leadership Survey Conflict, Competition, and Collaboration in Co-Located Schools: School Leaders Navigating Structural Distrust Responding to Crisis: A Multiple Case Study of District Approaches for Supporting Student Learning in the COVID-19 Pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1