Sacrificing Leaders, Villainizing Leadership: How Educational Accountability Policies Impair School Leadership

Abstract

Has the culture of accountability become a culture of fear for school leaders? The authors share the stories of three successful principals whose careers and reputations were altered by the impact of a set of test scores.

Perceptions of the impact of accountability on the role of principals.

“…Grounding discussions about policy and improvement in practices in outcomes from surveys is common practice and polling public and professional attitudes has been a key component of efforts to improve public schools for some time (Elam & Brodinsky, 1989;Gallup, 1970;Langdon & Vesper, 2000;Rose & Gallup, 2002. Our findings reflect less than positive general attitudes of educational leaders toward the acceptability and effects of a well-known and long-standing accountability program; these outcomes parallel those reflected in other research on opinions about educational reforms (Ladd & Zelli, 2002;McGhee & Nelson, 2005;Tucker & Codding, 2002a, 2002b.…”

“…Concerns about accountability have cast education into a damage control mode and educational leaders as well as those who prepare them bear considerable burden and blame as criticisms remain strong or escalate and efforts to salvage the system become ancient history (Berliner & Biddle, 1995;Bracey, 1997;Cotton, 2003;Goldberg, 2004Goldberg, , 2005Hill, 2002;Kelley & Peterson, 2002;McGhee & Nelson, 2005;Stein, & Gewirtzman, 2003). In this regard, Tucker & Codding (2002b) paint a vivid picture:…”

“…Goals, objectives, directives, roles, responsibilities, programs, and activities have been targeted for sweeping changes; educational leaders have driven and been driven by all the "movements." The insistence by policymakers and politicians that educators be held accountable for student outcomes has resulted in dramatic shifts in the responsibilities of department chairs, principals, and superintendents (Duke, Grogan, Tucker, & Heinecke, 2003;Goldberg, 2004Goldberg, , 2005Ladd & Zelli, 2002;McGhee & Nelson, 2005;Tucker & Codding, 2002b). For example, principals today, particularly those in public schools, have myriad and varied leadership and managerial responsibilities as they carry out their roles.…”

Leading with Heart: Urban Elementary Principals as Advocates for Students

“…Nichols, Glass, and Berliner (2006) discussed the pressures presented by accountability that could contribute to decisions principals make regarding curricular programs for students. Sometimes the overwhelming pressure for principals to demonstrate student achievement on standardized tests influences results in their pressuring teachers to teach to the test and help students pass at all costs (McGhee & Nelson, 2005).…”

Negotiating for Democratic Communities in Schools: Principals’ Perspectives

“…This is typical of Theory X leadership which McGregor (1960) found to be incompatible with democratic organizations because it conflicted with individual needs fulfillment in the work place. Although control may discourage participation and productivity in organizations, it may be necessary in the bureaucratic pattern of governance that characterizes most school systems, where principals are mostly responsible for outcomes (Crow, Hausman, & Scribner, 2002;McGhee & Nelson, 2005;Short & Greer, 1999;Thompson, Blackmore, Sachs, & Tregenza, 2003). Control may lead to tension between democracy and accountability as explained by Mullen's (2006) third strand of democratic leadership capacity -"democratic accountability" (p.100), in which leaders have to negotiate the seemingly contradictory forces of democracy and accountability.…”