A School Principal and Desegregation

There are times for abstract analysis, and times for detailed reporting and commentary about real events. This section is reserved for the latter.     

美国废除公共学校种族隔离政策决策依据探微

对教育政策决策行为背后思想依据的考察是深刻理解教育政策的关键.本研究以美国废除公共学校种族隔离政策为例,探究最高法院的法官们决策时重点考虑的问题以及为何如此决策.决策基于对当时美国社会现实的思考,与三权分立原则下最高法院的权限、联邦制原则下教育在美国宪法中的定位有关,是当时历史条件下所能得出的最有利于教育公平的选择.     

Stunted Desegregation in Los Angeles

This report is an independent evaluative study of administrative decentralization in the Cleveland Public Schools carried out under contract with the Cleveland Board of Education. The study reviewed the history of decentralization, synthesized the literature on its contemporary development since 1970, summarized its emergence in Cleveland since 1980, and then focused intensively on events during 1984‐1985, Year 3 in that system's scheduled reorganization.

Relevant documents were reviewed from February through May of 1985. Then, 18 administrators, 6 from each of 3 levels, were interviewed in depth in March. In June, 18 other administrators and 14 teachers at 7 schools were interviewed as well. A questionnaire was sent to 335 administrators and 433 teachers, and 444 were returned, for a response rate of 58 percent. The project did not include Board members or parents and community leaders from School‐Community Councils.

Respondents gave fairly high ratings to the value of decentralization for Cleveland and were especially favorable toward the value of increased autonomy for school principals, school control over teacher selection, and school‐community councils. They rated the success of decentralization as of 1985 as no more than average, however, and they gave average ratings to the effort's overall impact thus far on school improvement. Most of those surveyed estimated the system was at the half‐way mark on the road to 100 percent implementation.

Teachers and field administrators generally regard the Board and the central administration as sources of obstacles to the evolution of decentralization. Most teachers have yet to become involved in the effort and this disinvolvement, combined with a more negative attitude by about half of the central staff, depressed the ratings of success and progress overall. In addition, there is a racial effect. White educators in Cleveland are less positive than Black educators toward decentralization.

The study found that the technical aspects of administrative decentralization are in excellent working order; that cluster directors, principals, and key subgroups of senior administrators at headquarters are very enthusiastic about the reorganization and its aims; and that school‐based teacher selection has been working quite well. However, some organizational obstacles remain to be surmounted: central staff lack incentives to let go of old bureaucratic procedures; too few pathways exist for widescale teacher participation; and cluster offices have too many paperwork duties and too few resources to allow them to carry out all of their work effectively. Many assistant principals, moreover, have not been delegated parts to play in decentralization. The implication of this study is that much has been accomplished on decentralization during Year 3, but the notion that the change can be fully installed in three years is in itself unrealistic.

The study concluded by recommending a reform in Cleveland's current practices of selecting principals so that the very best leadership can be secured in future years. It further recommended that organizational rather than technical planning be undertaken in order to integrate the four great changes now in progress in the system: desegregation, decentralization, educational improvement, and fiscal retrenchment. Some final suggestions were also discussed for improving the more affective aspects of decentralization, such as teacher morale and central staff participation in the field.