Post-industrial governments are demanding higher levels of accountability, not least in the education sector. Accountability in British Columbia's schools was initially based upon inspectors' reports. It evolved into an accreditation process. This article analyzes the British Columbia public school accreditation process using an expanded model of accountability based on Lundgren (1990). The main subjects of discussion are the difficulty of accreditation serving two audiences, and the nature of the accreditation manual. Les gouvernements post-industriels exigent une responsabilisation accrue, y compris et surtout dans le secteur de l'éducation. L'obligation de rendre compte dans les écoles de la Colombie-Britannique a d'abord été fondée sur les rapports des inspecteurs, puis a progressivement donné lieu à un processus d'agrément. Cet article analyse le processus d'agrément des écoles publiques de la Colombie-Britannique en faisant appel à un modèle élargi de responsabilité issu de Lundgren (1990). Les principaux thèmes abordés sont la difficulté de l'agrément en présence de deux auditoires ainsi que la nature du manuel d'agrément. Post-industrial governments have been characterized as managerialist (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). Many embrace a "new right" discourse (Angus, 1992; Apple, 1993; Dale & Ozga, 1993). In either description, accountability "down the line" is a sine qua non. Accountability can be seen as a top-down means to ensure efficient and effective services in "hard times." Kogan (1986), however, has defined accountability as an institutionalized form of responsibility backed by authority in a power relationship (p. 30). In this article I examine the contrast between the central political perspective and the local professional one in the accountability of school systems in British Columbia. 1 This contrast is developed mainly through exploratory analysis of a few recent school accreditation reports as well as an analysis of objectives in the centrally (i.e., provincial Ministry of Education) developed accreditation manual. Accountability within a system is complex. It is essentially a reciprocal relational responsibility. The authority requires a justification of what has been done usually in return for its financial investment. This justification provides the basis for dominance in the relationship. Furthermore, the evidence required in the education sector is often difficult to produce. The emphasis in accountability can be on finding out who is responsible for problems and then "fixing" them. Sometimes this sharp edge of accountability, felt as blame, misconstrues the 18
