Nevertheless, school bureaucracy does exist to prevent discrimination, favoritism or fraud, and maintain minimum academic standards (Rothstein, 1993). As Goodsell (2004) and Olsen (2005) reason, school bureaucracy still exhibits some positive elements. It helps free street-level bureaucrats from dealing with complex environments in order to spend time improving teaching, and the bureaucratic problems can be solved in a more specific and intelligible way. Smith and Meier (1994, 1995) argued that bureaucracy could be a positive force when problems, for instance poverty, exist because the absence of administration would place additional burdens on teachers, forcing them to spend more time on administrative matters rather than teaching students. …show more content…
Against what Chubb and Moe (1988, 1991) have put forward, Smith (1994), using a district-level data set of Florida public schools, further examined the linkages between organization, competition and public school performance. Findings of this single state research, through rigorous analysis, failed to provide evidence as public choice advocates argued school bureaucracy is the determinant of school performance. Moreover, bureaucracy has not been proven the impact for poor school performance. In a converse way, competition between public and private schools appeared to result in a creaming effect, which will exacerbate the already considerable inequities among school districts (Smith, 1994). Furthermore, Smith and Meier (1995) continued to test the cream-skimming hypothesis as above, showing that there is lack of evidence to conclude public choice as better way to pursue satisfying performance. Arguing that the demand for a higher quality education rests heavily on comparisons between public and private schools, public choice, to some extent, would create more potential religious services and racial segregation, which are not the original functions of public school using supported tax. In brief, no conclusive evidence demonstrates that eliminating democratic control of schools and submitting education to the forces of the market would produce the desired effects (Smith and Meier,
Often, when the discussion of American bureaucracy is broached in conversation, those holding these conversations often think of the many men and women who operate behind the scenes within the government. This same cross section of Americans is looked upon as the real power within the federal government and unlike the other branches of government, has little to no oversight. A search of EBSCO resulted in the following definition, an organization “structure with a rigid hierarchy of personnel, regulated by set rules and procedures” (Bureaucracy, 2007). Max Weber believed that a bureaucracy was technically the most efficient form of organization, one structured around official functions that are bound by rules, each function having its own specified competence (2007). This wide ranging group of Americans has operated within the gaps, behind the scenes, all under the three core branches of government: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The division of government into three branches and separate powers gives each branch both exclusive powers and some additional power...
The oversite committee then evaluates the success of their money allocation and incentivize the success of the public school’s education. “Americans do not appear ready to pay the price.” (Barber, p. 215) Money is the most powerful motivator, and if the success of school districts reaps the benefits of more financial resource, educators will fight to be the best. This new desire to be the best, is possible with the equalization of opportunity from the allocation of funds to the poorer schools. The race to the top would already be won by the larger, richer, and more powerful school districts without those foundational funds. “Because we believe in profits, we are consummate salespersons and efficacious entrepreneurs.” (217) Barber’s essay supports the idea of incentivized results. Not only would districts compete with other schools, but their standards would be raised year after year in consequence to the oversite of the
The major concepts of this article relate to the ineffectiveness of school leadership programs. Arthur Levine found that a majority of the programs were inadequate. He noted four areas in which these programs lacked efficiency. These areas of concern were the rise in off-campus low quality programs, weak research-intensive universities that are working towards awarding doctoral degrees in administration, competition for students is causing lowered program quality and admission criteria, and the fact that state and local school districts are adding to the problem by salary incentives for advanced degrees. Levine noted several major issues that affect school administration programs. First, he revealed that many people who had finished these programs agreed that the curriculum was irrelevant; they said that it did prepare them to deal with "on-the-job issues." Second, the issues of low admission and graduation standards were addressed. The study illustrated how many schools lower their standards to increase admission and create tuition "cash cows." Third, he discussed the issue of these schools having weak faculties.
She realized that choice and accountability were not the answer, but that curriculum and instruction were more viable solutions to America’s educational dilemma. Ravitch suggests that to abandon public schools is to abandon the institution that supports our concepts of democracy and citizenship and to the promise of American life (Ravitch, 2011, p. 12-14). The idea of school choice is rooted in Milton Friedman’s essay concerning the government’s role in education. Friedman asserted that society should support and contribute to the maximum freedom of the individual or the family. He maintained that the government should provide vouchers to help support parents financially on their children’s education, which parents could use at the school of their choosing; so long as the school met set standards. Therefore, this creation of choice would stimulate competition, which Friedman believed would increase the development and improvement of nonpublic schools, as well as, create a variety of school options (Ravitch, 2011, p. 115). As a result of the choice movement, the public received three versions of school choice: voucher schools, private schools, and charter schools. Each of these schools receives public funding, but do not operate as traditional public schools, and are not managed by a government agency (Ravitch, 2011, p. 121). Charter schools became the most popular choice of this new
Modern Bureaucracy in the United States serves to administer, gather information, conduct investigations, regulate, and license. Once set up, a bureaucracy is inherently conservative. The reason the bureaucracy was initiated may not continue to exist as a need in the future. The need or reason may change with a change in the times and the culture needs. A bureaucracy tends to make decisions that protect it and further it’s own existence, possibly apart from the wishes of the populace. It may not consistently reflect what might be optimal in terms of the needs and wants of the people. Local governments employ most of the United States civil servants. The 14 cabinet departments in the U.S. are run day-to-day by career civil servants, which have a great deal of discretionary authority.
Raymond, Margaret E. (2014, February 1). To no avail: A critical look at the charter school debate. Phi Delta Kappan, Vol.95 (5) pp.8-12. http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=6aa05956-5bfe-43eb-9eec-b90be0fefa60%40sessionmgr113&vid=9&hid=125
Education supports everyone getting opportunities in life and being able to choose better for themselves. As Horace Mann wrote, education is the “great equalizer for all.“ However, the United States Public School system will likely never be able to equally educate its masses of students. Public school educating all fairly is a myth.There is no one entity to blame for this failure. The failure lies with each student who has been conditioned to sit passively in an un-engaging classroom. Its failure lies in some students disrespectfully distracting their classmates and frustrating their once inspired teacher or administrator. The failure lies with administration being distracted with causes of the moment and burns out from knowing that all
Zimmer, R. and Buddin, R. (2009), Is Charter School Competition in California Improving the Performance of Traditional Public Schools?. Public Administration Review, 69: 831–845. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02033.x
This essay will discuss the mainstream and critical perspectives of bureaucracy and post-bureaucracy. It will begin by examining the characteristics of bureaucracy and then compare the mainstream and the critical views. Post-bureaucracy will then be discussed using the same structure.
The gap between the nation’s best and worst public schools continues to grow. Our country is based on freedom and equality for all, yet in practice and in the spectrum of education this is rarely the case. We do not even have to step further than our own city and its public school system, which many media outlets have labeled “dysfunctional” and “in shambles.” At the same time, Montgomery County, located just northwest of the District in suburban Maryland, stands as one of the top school systems in the country. Within each of these systems, there are schools that excel and there are schools that consistently measure below average. Money alone can not erase this gap. While increased spending may help, the real problem is often rooted in the complex issues of social, cultural, and economic differences. When combined with factors involving the school itself and the institution that supports it, we arrive at what has been widely known as the divide between the suburban and urban schools. Can anything actually be done to reverse this apparent trend of inequality or are the outside factors too powerful to change?
Even in this time of struggle, with billions of dollars going towards various war efforts overseas, America still has managed to keep taxpayer investments in education higher than that of funds for national defense (U.S Department of Education). In the 2004-05 school year, there was an estimated amount of 536 billion dollars set aside from taxpayer investment for education purposes. Without a doubt, education is a priority for the American government, and if these funds are used in the correct way, there is no reason why each and every kid in the United States shouldn’t be getting a quality education. However, the organization of the financial system is flawed, funds are not handled proportionately at the state level; rather, this system favors the wealthier districts and hands more funds to them while the less wealthier districts are handed a smaller pool of funds. This really affects America’s quality of education, which also reflects upon how America fairs on the world stage when it comes to competition in education with other countries. The disorganization of funds in the United States can be seen in the Hoover City School district, which has bought every student in that district an iPad for use in school. The first problem with this is that this school district does not even have a viable bus system that can transport students to and from school. Secondly, not even 20 miles from this district lies the Birmingham City School district where a little more than half the students are graduating, compared to Hoover City Schools where a bit more than 90 percent of the students are graduating. If anything, the state should be working towards improving educational standards in lower-income communities rather than debating on the log...
This paper discusses how the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the United States government interact to allow each individual in a public school freedom to pray while not endorsing any religion.
The Public Choice For some parents, deciding on a school for their children can be a difficult decision. Many parents do not spend much time thinking about it; they place their children into the local school designated by where they live. Others attended a private school themselves and found that it was a beneficial experience and therefore want the same for their kids. But which is better: private schools or public schools? While there are many advantages and disadvantages to each (nothing is going to be absolutely perfect), we are going to focus on the benefits of an education in the public school system, or in other words, schools funded by the government that are for anyone to attend.
Many people in today’s society believe it’s wise to send their children to private schools. In making the decision on whether to put children in public or private schools, they look to four main factors: curriculum, class size, the graduation rate, and cost. When people have to pay for something, their first thought is, “Will I be getting what I’m paying for?” With a private school education, the amount you have to pay is usually well worth it. Public schools offer diversity. Here students can find people who are just like them and can associate better. Wherever you live, you have to send your child to the closest school. There’s no choice on what public school you can send your child to, whereas for private schools you can pick to send your child there. It’s not an easy choice for parents to decide, but many factors point toward a guarantee that a good education would be achieved, which is most important.
...the pressure of keeping up with other students. Here, they can work at their own pace and figure out a solution that best works for them to understand or solve a problem. One last idea school reform should address in creating an equality of opportunity in public schools would be to set standards and spend more time in the classroom on these important tasks. These standards are put into place to help evaluate one’s progress. It’s important to have some standards in place, but they need to be feasible. To make such standards feasible, the teacher will be able to tailor it so that the standard can be met by the student. Spending a decent amount of time to get students to reach these standards is imperative. Without a sufficient amount of time, students may not be able to grasp and fully understand what is being taught to them resulting in standards not being met.