Doctor of Philosophy, Miami University, 2021, Educational Leadership

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) passed in 2002 was the "most extraordinary expansion of federal power over public schools in American history" (Sunderman & Orfield, 2006). NCLB had two major impacts on educational policy. First, it legitimized and strengthened the federal government's role in both influencing and regulating state and local compliance with educational policy mandates. Second, it codified student performance on content-specific standardized tests as the most reliable and valid measure of how well those who lead and teach in public schools are preparing students for the workforce (Bracey, 2009; Pinar, 2012; Schneider, 2017; Sunderman & Orfield, 2006). Without much public debate, and no longer questioned, performance metrics reduce the purpose of schooling to raising test scores and preparing students for the workforce (Eisner, 2001; Pinar, 2012; McDermott, 2011; Schneider, 2017). NCLB also set in motion market-based reforms expanding school choice options which threaten the very sustainability of public education (Bracey, 2009; Manna, 2007; Pinar 2012; Schneider, 2017). Anderson and Cohen (2018) have suggested that we are a pivotal moment where it is possible to move into a post-reform era which should be led by educators to reclaim their professional agency and the legitimacy of public schooling by decentering performance accountability as the primary driver of educational policy. This interpretivist, case study was comprised of five district superintendents from central Ohio who participate in a collaborative group called the Hart County Design Team (HCDT). The study found that participating in the HCDT collaborative facilitated the ability of the superintendents to engage in leadership practices to counter, not just resist, the impacts of performance accountability on their professional agency, the districts they lead, and the communities they serve. The HCDT functioned as an alliance that created a space where the group could discuss shared va (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Thomas Poetter (Committee Chair); Denise Taliaferro Baszile (Committee Member); Joel Malin (Committee Member); Brian Schultz (Committee Member) Subjects: Educational Leadership

PHD, Kent State University, 2020, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Political Science

The research examines whether and how performance-based funding formulas adopted by state policymakers for their public colleges and universities influence administrative behavior, both across and within institutions in states where the formulas are in place. The research builds from the public management literature and argues that despite the formulas being premised as a way to improve college and university performance, they must first influence administrative behavior at the institutional-level. If the formulas do not influence administrative behavior, there is little expectation for improved performance. However, if administrators do respond, how they respond can have a conditional effect on the success of performance-based funding and college and university performance. The research examines administrative responsiveness through a variety of managerial behaviors and decision-making, such as changes in budgetary patterns and capacity-building efforts.

Committee: Daniel Hawes (Committee Co-Chair); Anthony Molina (Committee Co-Chair); Mark Cassell (Committee Member); Alisa Hicklin-Fryar (Other); Mark Kretovics (Other) Subjects: Higher Education; Higher Education Administration; Public Administration; Public Policy

Doctor of Philosophy, University of Akron, 2018, Public Administration

The research issue addressed in this exploratory, qualitative, pre-quantitative study provides an in depth analysis of the paradigmatic shift in public higher education from an inputs-based model, based on enrollment to an output-based model based on graduation and completion. The public sector has undergone scrutiny and a demand for more accountability. However, higher education has not remained immune. Moreover, for decades, higher education in the United States had been regarded as the largest producer of college graduates. However, with the U.S. no longer the lone leader, the need to increase the number of citizens with a college degree is critical, in order to remain globally competitive. Consequently, public higher education is overseen by individual states in this country with varied structures. These differences can result in disparities among performance metrics as well as reporting. The study employed the two major governing structures of higher education-Consolidated Governing Boards and Coordinating Boards and posed the question, “Does the organizational structure of state governing bodies of higher education influence the completion or graduation rates of students at four-year public institutions based on race and income”? Due to the scarcity of research on this topic, this exploratory study relinquished traditional research terms and examined five factors that might influence research outcomes related to graduation and completion based on governance structure. Furthermore, ten state systems were selected based on enrollment. The results of this study found that organizational structure did not influence graduation or completion among four-year public institutions. Rather, the findings revealed that more research is required on funding models, such as Performance Based Funding and the intersection of race and income.

Committee: Raymond Cox Dr. (Advisor) Subjects: Higher Education; Public Administration

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 1971, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects: Education

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2002, Public Policy and Management

This research investigates the effects of rewards policies on classroom assessment practices used by teachers and subsequent effects on student performance. Rewards policies provide financial bonuses to schools based on high or improving student performance on standardized examinations. Reflecting a trend toward demanding more accountability from public institutions in the 1990s, 20 states had such policies by the beginning of the 2000-2001 school year. Because rewards policies tie financial incentives to student performance on standardized examinations, it seems reasonable to expect that they may affect the way teachers assess students in their classrooms. The two studies in this research (pre-post and non-equivalent control group studies) use data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) from 1992 and 1998. Teachers of students selected for NAEP who took the 4th grade reading assessment were asked how often they used different assessment practices and about many other characteristics (e.g., educational attainment, experience, and teaching philosophy). These data are used to estimate a two-stage model. In the first stage, classroom assessment practices are estimated as functions of the policy indicator and other explanatory variables using weighted binary probit models. Where there is evidence that rewards policies affect the frequency with which teachers use classroom assessment practices, the first-stage instruments are included in (second-stage) models of student performance, models estimated with weighted least-squares regression. All models were estimated accounting for the multi-stage sampling design with which the students were drawn from their respective populations. This research shows that students with teachers exposed to rewards policies are more likely to be tested with multiple-choice tests and also have higher performance than those not exposed. The increased multiple-choice testing may reflect teachers' interest in preparing stude (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Mary Marvel (Advisor) Subjects:

Doctor of Philosophy, University of Akron, 2006, Public Administration

Accountability has become a key issue in nonprofit literature—but public trust in nonprofits continues to decline. This study comprises a survey of nonprofit organizations in Summit County, Ohio to construct an exploratory and descriptive analysis of the practice and theory of appraising the performance of the executive director seeking to link the performance appraisal of executive directors to the accountability of organizations. The intent of this study is to examine the procedures and policies used to evaluate the performance of nonprofit executive directors. In addition, this study examines literature salient to the issues of nonprofit governance and administration, accountability, and performance appraisal, within a theoretical framework of decision making. Boards of directors have access to more information than ever before regarding how to function as a governing body, and how to learn, develop, and grow as individuals responsible for overseeing organizations. Yet little encourages board members to delve deeper into their organizations, instead they are often discouraged from micromanaging. This study seeks to discover just how intensely boards are examining the source of their information—the executive director. The research question is: Is a performance appraisal conducted, and what factors contribute to that phenomenon? Suggestions for areas of improvement are also addressed. One hundred and fourteen responses were obtained using a survey designed specifically for this project. Results showed significant relationships between concrete factors such as the size of the organization and the existence of standardized performance appraisal procedures and whether an appraisal is conducted. Variables representing perceptions and beliefs also demonstrated relationships suggesting factors that influence whether a performance appraisal is conducted.

Committee: Raymond Cox III (Advisor) Subjects: