The purpose of this study was to describe public school administrators’ perceptions of the development and implementation of educational policy and whether policies being implemented in the current educational reform environment meet the criteria for high leverage policies according to The High Leverage Policy Framework (Cobb, Donaldson, Lemons, & Mayer, 2010). This framework is predicated upon the understanding that the development of education policy is part of a larger political and social context, which must be taken into account by those creating those policies. Furthermore, while the perceptions of those responsible for the implementation of policies are often overlooked, they are crucial to understanding the challenges presented by implementation efforts.
A cross-sectional survey was the method used to collect data for this study. The sample was drawn from the population of public school superintendents and principals in Massachusetts who were responsible for implementing the 2010 Massachusetts antibullying policy at the district or school level. The online survey yielded 319 responses from Superintendents and Principals across the State of Massachusetts. Analysis of responses generated 18 notable findings regarding school administrators’ perceptions of process of development and implementation of educational policies.
Eighty to 93% of the Massachusetts public school administrators who participated in this study reported that the number and pace of the creation of educational policies overwhelm administrators and inhibit effective implementation. Furthermore, participants reported that they are not given enough resources to effectively implement these policies. A descriptive and inferential statistical analysis of the totality of the data indicated that participants held a more negative view of the overall policy environment than they did of the Massachusetts antibullying policy enacted in 2010. Additionally, with respect to the high leverage policy framework, participants’ responses indicated the elements of design features and implementation contingencies were the points within the system where the breakdown between the development and implementation of educational policies was most apparent.
|Advisor:||Nienhusser, H. Kenny|
|Commitee:||D'Annolfo, Suzi, LaRocco, Diana J., McKenzie, Anne|
|School:||University of Hartford|
|School Location:||United States -- Connecticut|
|Source:||DAI-A 76/09(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Education Policy, Public policy|
|Keywords:||Education, Implementation, Policy, Reform|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be