Policy Analysis For Educational Leaders A Step-By-step Approach

The A y n & Bacon Educational Leadershign Series
POLICY ANALYSIS FOR

E D U C A T I O N A L LEADERS
A STEP-BY-STEP APPROACH
Nicola A. Alexander
University of Minnesota
Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle River
Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto
Delhi Mexico City SdoPaulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo
Dedication
To Alexis, for whom I always want to make a difference
A B O U T THE A U T H O R
N i c o l a A. Alexander (Ph.D., U n i v e r s i t y at A l b a n y ) is an Associate Professor i n the

Department of Organizational Leadership, Policy, and D e v e l o p m e n t at the University
o f Minnesota. She is also co-coordinator of its Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Program,
H e r f o r m a l education background is in public administration and policy. She is particu-
larly interested i n issues of adequacy, equity, and p r o d u c t i v i t y as they relate to PreK-12
education. Dr. Alexander?s overriding concern revolves around notions of fairness, and
she examines the potentially different impact of education policies on diverse groups,
She maintains that as policymakers and analysts, w e need to ensure that p o l i c y sup-
ports student success.
Dr. Alexander is a f o r m e r board member of the A m e r i c a n Education Finance
Association and presently serves as a board member of the N a t i o n a l Education Finance
Association. She has served on the editorial board of Educational Administration Quar-
terly and has published articles and presented on issues of adequacy, equity, and pro-
d u c t i v i t y as they relate to PreK-12 education. She has published i n books, monographs,
and journals, including American Educational Research Journal, Educational Policy, Journal
of School Business Management, and Journal of Education Finance.
vi
PREFACE
RATIONALE FOR THIS TEXT

[ have taught courses i n p o l i c y analysis for over a decade b o t h i n schools of public pol-
icy and in a d e p a r t m e n t of educational p o l i c y and administration. I teach n o w i n a
department of organizational leadership and development. While teaching the required
graduate courses i n education policy, I realized that there was no analytical policy text
that matched the needs of m y students.
M y students require a methods course on h o w to do policy analysis. The d i f f i c u l t y
js that although m a n y educational texts discussed and evaluated existing education
policy they d i d n o t teach students how to complete the necessary analytical steps.
Indeed, education policy texts are often a survey of the literature on policy studies. The
policy analysis texts that take a methodological approach are often grounded i n eco-
nomic analysis. They typically do n o t p r o v i d e enough background and foundational
knowledge to education administrators and policymakers on h o w to complete an anal-
ysis of policy. I f o u n d that, to f u l f i l l the objectives of m y class, I relied on various texts
that I b o r r o w e d f r o m several sources, and I supplemented those materials w i t h per-
sonal knowledge and expertise.
While it is g o o d to have a variety of perspectives and pedagogical tools, I k e p t
thinking that h a v i n g one text that addressed the needs of the students w o u l d m a k e
their policy analytical j o u r n e y go more smoothly. I also began to think that education
leaders i n the field w o u l d f i n d the content of a practical text valuable. Policy Analysisf o r
Educational Leaders: A Step-by-Step Approach is a culmination of years of m y telling col-
leagues and students that I think a policy analytical b o o k that covered all the topics that
I wanted w o u l d be a welcome addition to the field.
The approach of Policy Analysis for Educational Leaders is a synthesis of the
approaches that worked well w i t h the various texts that I used in my policy analysis
classes. I found the educational and practical focus of some texts on policy analysis to
be useful in offering insight into policy making and the politics of education. These
texts formed a useful backdrop to analysis, but I needed to gear their content toward
the method of policy analysis rather than the process of policy making. A methodologi-
cal focus was a key part of the book that I imagined.
Ialso liked texts that emphasized the theoretical framework of policy analysis, but
students sometimes found their content to be abstract and difficult to apply. I wanted to
make these materials more readable and readily applicable for education practitioners.
Practicality was also a key aspect of the book I imagined. ,
Several texts provided excellent analytical guidelines but did so from an economic
perspective. I wanted to make those books more accessible to education administrators
and to provide to education leaders more of an explanation of the underlying economic
principles that undergird those discussions. Making the necessary connections for edu-
cation leaders was an important part of the book I imagined.
In the end, I imagined a book that would offer a practical guide to policy analysis,
include educational content, and be filled w i t h education examples. I wanted to go
vil
viii Preface
b e y o n d the t y p i c a l p o l i c y steps t h a t s t o p p e d at r e c o m m e n d a t i o n a n d to i n c l u d e ;
mentation, monitoring, and evaluation. I hope that, on reading Policy Analysisfor eg ©

tional Leaders, you find it as I imagined it, and that it offers practical guidan Uca.
education leaders in their effort to make the world a better place. £€ to
O R G A N I Z A T I O N OF THE TEXT
This book is organized into 13 chapters. The text begins by laying the groundwork ;
policy analysis. Chapter 1 offers a rationale for the importance of policyanalysisand
why education leaders would be interested in this topic. It highlights theimportan,id
of values and philosophy in the policy analysis process as a starting point in think; e
about the development of policy. Chapter 2 continues this theme by pointing outt hat
policy analysis is essentially problem analysis and introduces the steps Necessary to
conduct effective policy analysis. It also provides a discussion on how policyanalysis
fits in with the broader stages of the policy-making process. The overview of the ste S
provided in Chapter 2 is expanded upon in the remaining chapters, where each ste
has an individual chapter devoted to it. (The last chapter?Chapter 13?synthesize,
all the steps of the process by applying them to the introduction and progress of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, reauthorized in 2002 as the No Child Left
Behind Act.)
Chapter 3 focuses on the definition of the problem. I t gives clear guidance on how
to structure a p r o b l e m and create a policy statement. I t includes a description of the
steps necessary i n creating a problem statement and the difficulties therein. I t also dis.
cusses the goals that arise from the identification of the problem. By defining the prob-
lem, education leaders focus attention on the social condition that m u s t be changed in
order to i m p r o v e society.
Chapter 4 offers a discussion on h o w education leaders can make the case that the
facts support their description of the w o r l d and, ultimately, their solution to what they
f i n d w r o n g w i t h it. It is n o t enough to p o i n t o u t problems and to identify solutions if
others are n o t persuaded b y one?s analysis. This chapter gives guidance on how to
assemble facts i n a m e a n i n g f u l w a y so that they become transformed into persuasive
evidence,
Chapter 5 discusses the importance of establishing driving values in the choices
education leaders make regarding problem definitions, alternatives, and implemented
strategy. Determining evaluative criteria requires looking at the cost of various alter-
natives, the net benefits associated with the outcomes, the administrative ease associ-
ated w i t h implementing that alternative, and so on. In essence, the criteria selected say
something about the assumptions regarding the role of society, government, and the
economy.
Chapter 6 describes the interventions that need to be considered to resolve or
alleviate the negative condition identified by education leaders. Alternatives are not
to be confused w i t h the outcomes sought and are always a means to an end; they are
not an end in and of themselves. This chapter examines the process for developing
alternatives.
Chapter 7 offers guidelines on how to consider and articulate the rationale used to
weigh the policy options (or alternatives) and their outcomes against the criteria that
were established. The explicit evaluation of alternatives is an important policy analytical
Preface ix
step because, i f the decision-making process is covert and intuitive, it is m o r e likely to

reduce accountability. Reduced accountability reduces the c r e d i b i l i t y of the results
stemming from the policy analysis process. Moreover, reduced credibility often lessens
the ability of education leaders to persuade c o m m u n i t y members that the p a t h chosen
is the appropriate one.
Chapter8 i s an explicit discussion of the process of deciding on the appropriate
policy option, n o t just w e i g h i n g h o w the p o l i c y options compare on the various criteria.
This chapter focuses on the steps needed to test the credibility of the results o f the previ-
ous steps. This discussion also delves m o r e deeply into the appropriate role of policy
analysts in this process once they have evaluated the alternatives.
Chapter 9 focuses on persuading relevant stakeholders on the appropriateness of
a decision once it has been made. This chapter looks closely at the best w a y to c o m m u -
nicate that information. I t p r o v i d e s advice on the structure of p o l i c y arguments and
information about the different modes of policy arguments, and i t tries to teach educa-
tion leaders to havea better understanding of their audience.
Chapter 10 is an explicit recognition that, for policies to have meaningful impact,
they must be carried out. This chapter focuses on the implementation process and offers
guidance to help education leaders anticipate challenges that m a y arise. The discussion
includes an overview of the stages of implementation, the hurdles o fi m p l e m e n t a t i o n ,
leadership challenges, a n d a guide to creating an implementation plan.
Chapter 11 is a discussion of the monitoring process. By monitoring behavior and
outputs associated with tackling the problem, education leaders provide data for evalu-
ation and prediction that informs knowledge about whether and whya p o l i c y pro-
duced the desired results. Monitoring offers information on what happened and
informs analytical decisions on how it happened and why. It is the penultimate step in
the policy analytical process and connects the actions outlined in the implementation
plan with policy objectives.
Chapter 12 examines the evaluation process, the last formal step in the policy
analysis process. Evaluation focuses on the achievement of goals and objectives. It is the
production of information about the value of policy outcomes. While actual evaluation
occurs after implementation, it is imperative to have an evaluation plan from the outset.
This step is essential for education leaders to consider because it offers them an oppor-
tunity to provide clear guidance on what constitutes an improvement of the problem-
atic condition.
Chapter 13 offers concluding remarks. In this chapter, I reiterate the importance o f
the policy analysis process, especially f o r education leaders. I summarize the steps i n
the policy analysis process and a p p l y it to a substantive education policy in the United
States, the N o C h i l d Left Behind Act.
The text also includes a removable field guide: ?Pullout Field Guide f o r Educational
Leaders: S u m m a r y o f Checklist of Each Step of the Policy A n a l y t i c a l Process.? This
pullout feature is a quick overview of the entire process and offers easy-to-access guid-
ance on all ten policy analytical steps contained i n Policy Analysis for Educational Leaders,
DISTINGUISHING FEATURES
M y experience points to the need f o r a text that is methodological i n focus and educa-
tional i n context. T h i s text meets the needs o f aspiring and practicing educational
x Preface
administrators and policy leaders. To make sure the steps of p o l i c y analysis are clear, |
use chapter objectives and education vignettes to open each chapter. The substance of
each chapter is i n t e r w o v e n w i t h m u l t i p l e education examples, and w i t h figures an,d
tables s u m m a r i z i n g and h i g h l i g h t i n g m a n y o f the chapter?s m a i n points. Eachchapter
closes w i t h a s u m m a r y , reflective questions, news story for analysis, and selectedrefer.
ences and websites. Each of the selected references and websites includes an explana.
tion about w h y education leaders w o u l d f i n d the source to be of interest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Policy Analysis f o r Educational Leaders: A Step-by-Step Approach is the culmination of years

of interaction w i t h students i n p o l i c y classes. I w o u l d like to thank all those w h o encour.
aged m e to w r i t e this book, i n c l u d i n g colleagues and students w h o insisted n o t onl
that there was a need f o r this b o o k b u t that I should be the one to write it. I thank Peg
Sherven especially f o r p u t t i n g m e i n contact w i t h a representative f r o m Pearson.
I w o u l d like to t h a n k the people at Pearson Education and the reviewers of the
m a n u s c r i p t at various stages: Charles M. Achilles, Seton H a l l University; Dannielle J,
Davis, A l a b a m a State U n i v e r s i t y ; Charles P, Gause, U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h Carolina at
Greensboro; M a r t h a M c C a r t h y , I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y ; Paul E. Pitre, Washington State
U n i v e r s i t y ; and Jesulon Sharita Ronae Gibbs, South Carolina State University. I also
w a n t to m e n t i o n Steve Dragin, w h o gave me encouragement on an earlier draft, and
M e r e d i t h Fossel, w h o gave me encouragement on later ones. I w o u l d like to thank espe-
cially Anne Whittaker, w h o gave me h e l p f u l feedback on h o w to make the book better.
Talso w o u l d like to express m y appreciation for all those w h o granted me permission to
use their materials as part of this text. M y thanks as well to Marianne L?Abbate, who
p r o v i d e d t h o u g h t f u l copyediting i n the final stages of the manuscript.
Finally, I w o u l d like to acknowledge the cheering committee of m y daughter,
Alexis; sister, Marie; and mother, Monica, w h o assured m e that I w o u l d complete this
book. I w o u l d be remiss i f I did n o t m e n t i o n m y brothers, Neville, Christopher, Gregory,
a n d Wellesley, and their respective families. I also w a n t to m e n t i o n m y dad, Neville
Alexander, w h o always encouraged us to value education and the difference it can make.
I also think of Uncle H u m e , w h o was looking f o r w a r d to an autographed copy. Sorry
that it t o o k so l o n g . . .
BRIEF C O N T E N T S
Chapter 1 Laying t h e Groundwork 1
Chapter 2 G e t t i n g Started at t h e B e g i n n i n g : T h i n k i n g o f Policy

Analysis as Problem Analysis 28
Chapter 3 Taking the First Step: Define the Problem 48
Chapter 4 Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence 64
Chapter 5 Establish Your Driving Values 79
Chapter 6 Develop Alternatives 101
Chapter 7 W e i g h t h e Options: Evaluating A l t e r n a t i v e s 115
Chapter 8 Make Recommendations 128
Chapter 9 Persuade Y o u r A u d i e n c e 140
Chapter 10 Implement the Solution 153
C h a p t e r 11 Monitor Outputs 165
Chapter 12 Evaluate O u t c o m e s 178
Chapter 13 C o n c l u d i n g Remarks 192
P u l l o u t Field G u i d e f o r Educational Leaders: Summary o f Checklist o f
Each Step o f t h e Policy A n a l y t i c a l Process
References 201
Index 207
xi
CONTENTS
preface vii
Chapter 1 L A Y I N G THE G R O U N D W O R K 1
Chapter Objectives 1
Education V i g n e t t e 1
W h y Should Leaders Study Policy Analysis? 2

Players on t h e Leadership Landscape 2
W h a t Policy Analysis Can Do 2
The Role o f Persuasion 2

Users o f Policy Analysis 3
W h y Use This Text? 5

W h a t Is Policy Analysis? 5
A Brief D e f i n i t i o n 5
W h y Policy Analysis? 5
The Goal o f Policy Analysis 6
Types o f Policy Analysis 6
Ex Post a n d Ex A n t e Analysis 7
Forecasting, Prescribing, Monitoring, Evaluating 7 .

Rational Lens, Structural Lens, and Cultural Lens 8
Transparency Versus Objectivity 8
Philosophies o f Education 9
Values: Cornerstone o f Worldviews and Philosophies 10
Brief Overview o f Worldviews 10
Eight C o m m o n Values 11
D e f i n i n g Philosophy 14
Key Philosophies and Their Role in Education Policy 14
IDEALISM «14
Reausm 15
PRAGMATISM 16
PHENOMENOLOGY AND EXISTENTIALISM 17
Conrtict THEORY 17
POSTMODERNISM AND CRITICAL THEORY 20
Policy Values in A c t i o n 21
Chapter Summary 24
Review Questions 24
News Story for Analysis 24
xiit
xiv Contents
Discussion Questions 26
Selected Websites 26
Selected References 27
Chapter 2. GETTING STARTED A T THE B E G I N N I N G : T H I N K I N G OF

POLICY A N A L Y S I S AS PROBLEM A N A L Y S I S 28
Education Vignette 28
Where Do Y o u Start? 29
The Role o f Leaders 29
Policy Analysis as Problem Analysis 29
The Problem is t h e Beginning o f Analysis 29
Differences A m o n g Conditions, Policy Problems,
and Policy Issues 29
T h e Policy Analysis Process 31
THE CompPLexities OF Poticy ANALYSIS 31
Policy Analysis Versus Policy Making 32

The Role o f Policy Analysts 32
Phases in Policy M a k i n g 33
PROBLEM STREAM 33
Pouitics STREAM §=34
Poticy STREAM 34
Stages o f t h e Policy-Making Process 35

Issue Definition 35
Agenda Setting 36
Policy Formulation 36
Policy A d o p t i o n 37
Policy implementation 37
Policy Evaluation 37
Policy Analysis is N o t Policy Evaluation 38
Focusing on t h e Problem 38
Policy E v a l u a t i o n 3 9
Poticy EVALUATION AS FEEDBACK 39
Poticy EVALUATION AS SUMMATIVE JUDGMENT 39
Going Beyond Evaluation 40

The Steps t o Policy Analysis 41
The Craft o f Policy Analysis 41
Key Questions o f t h e Policy Analysis Process 41
C r e a t i n g a Policy A n a l y s i s R o a d m a p 41
TEN STEPS OF Poticy ANALYSIS 42
Contents xv
S t e p p i n g - S t o n e s o f Policy A n a l y s i s 44
Chapter Summary 44
R e v i e w Questions 44
News S t o r y f o r Analysis 45
Chapter 3 T A K I N G T H E F I R S T STEP: D E F I N E THE P R O B L E M 48

Structuring t h e Problem 49
W r i t i n g a Clear Description of t h e Problem 49
DIFFERENT PHASES IN PROBLEM STRUCTURING 49
P r o b l e m a t i c Characteristics o f Policy Problems 49
PERSONAL Versus PoLicy PROBLEM 50
INTERDEPENDENCE OF ProsLems 50
SUBJECTIVITY AND ARTIFICIALITY OF STRUCTURING PoLICy PROBLEMS 51
Dynamic NATURE OF POLICY PROBLEMS 52
Building on Y o u r C o n d i t i o n Statement 52
M a k i n g the Condition a Problem 53
Scope o f t h e Problem 54
Bounding t h e Problem 54
W h o Is InckuDED? = 54
Causes o f t h e P r o b l e m 55
RATIONAL PERSPECTIVE 56
INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE 56
CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE 56
Goals a n d O b j e c t i v e s o f S o l v i n g t h e P r o b l e m I d e n t i f i e d 58
T h e G o a l is t h e O b v e r s e o f t h e P r o b l e m 58
O b j e c t i v e s a r e W o r k i n g D e f i n i t i o n s o f Goals 58
Ossectives Versus ALTERNATIVES 59
Chapter S u m m a r y 60
News Story f o r Analysis 60
Chapter 4 M A K E THE C A S E B Y A S S E M B L I N G THE E V I D E N C E 64

Purpose o f Assembling t h e Evidence 65
xvi Contents
Functions o f Research 65
Transforming Data into Evidence 65
LAYING THE FOUNDATION 65
ASSESSING THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM 66
ASSESSING THE PARTICULAR FEATURES OF AN IDENTIFIED POLICY SITUATION 67
Assessinc Past Pouicies 67
Using t h e Purpose o f t h e Evidence t o Determine W h a t Is Needed 67
Evidence f o r M o n i t o r i n g 68
Evidence f o r Prescription 68
Evidence f o r Evaluation 69
Evidence f o r Forecasting 70
Determining t h e Value o f Specific Data 70
H o w D o Y o u M a k e G o o d Use o f D a t a ? 71
BultoInc Y o u r ArGuMENT 71
Assessinc Data Contexts 71
H o w t o Locate R e l e v a n t Sources 72
People and Documents are Key 72

COLLECTION STRATEGIES 72
DATA FROM PEOPLE WITHIN AND OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION 72
D a t a From DOCUMENTS WITHIN AND OUTSIDE YOuR
ORGANIZATION 7 3
H o w t o Categorize Types o f Data 73

Quantitative o r Qualitative Debate 73
Chapter 5 ESTABLISH Y O U R D R I V I N G V A L U E S 79
W h a t Do Y o u Care A b o u t ? 80
Establish Evaluative Criteria 80
Relationship Between Values a n d Criteria 80
W h a t Does Success Look Like? 81
W h a t Are t h e Specific Criteria That Frame

Policy Decisions? 82
Does It W o r k ? 82
How Witt You Know? 82
Is It Fair? 83
Contents xvii
HorizonTAt Equity 84
Vertical Equity 84
TRANSITIONAL Equity 86
ABILITY To Pay 86
BENEFITS PRINCIPLE 87
C a n W e A f f o r d It? 87
W h a t Is t h e Role o f Economics? 87
OPPORTUNITY Costs 88
Private Versus Pustic BENEFITS 88
PROVISION VERSUS PRODUCTION 89
COUNTING THE CosTs 90
Costs versus BeneFits 90
Decision Toots 91
H o w Can You TELL? 91
UsING THE Economic Toots 91
Cost-Benerit ANALYsis 92
W i l l P e o p l e S u p p o r t It? 92
H o w A c c e p t a b l e Is t h e A l t e r n a t i v e t o D i f f e r e n t G r o u p s ? 93
W h a t Factors I n f l u e n c e t h e Political A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f Policy? 93

H o w Can Y o u M e a s u r e t h e A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f a Policy? 93
H o w Can Y o u C h a n g e t h e A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f a Policy
Intervention? 94
W h o W i l l I m p l e m e n t It? 94
Is T h e r e S u f f i c i e n t A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Capacity?
94
W u a t Are THE MAJOR ORGANIZATIONAL LIMITATIONS? 9 4
H o w Can You T e t ? 94
W h a t if t h e Criteria Conflict? 96
Review Questions 97
Chapter 6 DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES 101

W h a t Are Altematives? 102
Alternatives Are Not Outcomes 102
Alternatives Are Not Implementation Plans 102
Basic Alternatives and Their Variants 102
Developing Alternatives b y Modeling t h e System 103
xvili_ Contents
The M e t a p h o r o f t h e M a r k e t 103
The Production M e t a p h o r 103
Evolutionary Models 104
Doing Nothing Different 104
H o w Do You Generate Altematives? 104
Sources o f A l t e r n a t i v e s 105
Generic Atternatives 105
CusTOMIZING PoLicy INTERVENTIONS 106
Policy Types 107

Policy M e c h a n i s m s a n d Best-Practice C o n t e x t 107
Inducements 108
C a p a c i t y - B u i l d i n g Policies 108
System C h a n g e Policies 109

Mandates 109
H o r t a t o r y Policies 109
Chapter Summary 110
Review Questions 1117

Chapter 7 WEIGH THE OPTIONS: EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES 115


H o w Do Y o u W e i g h Y o u r O p t i o n s ? 116
Anticipating the Future 117

SAFEGUARDS IN FORECASTING 117
Discussing R e l e v a n t Criteria 117
MEASURING EFrEcTIVENess 118
Measurinc Equity 119
Measuring Costs 119
MEASURING POLITICAL FeAsiBILiTy 120
MEASURING THE ABILITY OF AN ALTERNATIVE TO Be IMPLEMENTED 9120
Packaging Y o u r Alternatives 121
Distinguishing A m o n g Alternatives 121

Using Quick Q u a n t i t a t i v e Analysis 122
C r e a t i n g a Scorecard 122
Evaluating Alternatives: The Single-Step, Norm-Based

Approach 123
Contents xix
Evaluating Alternatives: The Two-Step, Criterion-Based

A p p r o a c h 124
Chapter Summary 125
N e w s S t o r y f o r Analysis 126
Discussion Q u e s t i o n s 126
Chapter 8 MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS 128

T r a n s f o r m i n g Trade-Offs into Preferred Results 128
Beyond Eeny, Meeny, Miny, M o e 129
Role o f t h e A n a l y s t 130
Transform Values into Results 130
Education Leader as Researcher, Bureaucrat, o r Entrepreneur? 130

Policy Analyst as Adviser and Decision Maker 131
Need f o r Advocacy 131
Value-Laden Arguments 131
Ethically Complex Arguments 132

Is There One Best Way? 133
Refine Approaches t o Recommendation 134
Testing t h e Credibility o f Y o u r R e c o m m e n d a t i o n 134
Chapter Summary 135
Chapter 9 PERSUADE YOUR AUDIENCE 140

The A r t o f Communication 141
H o w t o C o n v e y Y o u r Analysis 141
W h o Is Y o u r Aupience? 142
EXPECTATIONS OF AUDIENCE 142
AUDIENCE KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING 142
Aubience RESPONSE TO THE SOLUTION 143
xx Contents
Aupience Forum 143

Homocenous o r Diverse 143
COMPLETE OR ABRIDGED ANALysis 143
Time 144
Making the Policy Argument 144

AutHority 144
MetHop 144
GENERALIZATION 144
CLASSIFICATION 146
Cause 146
SIGN 146
Motivation 147
INTUITION 147
ANALOGY 147
ParALLe. Case 147
EtHics 147
Checklist f o r Communicating Analysis 148

Timeliness 148
Clarity of Findings 148

So W h a t ? 149
Chapter Summary 149
C h a p t e r 10 IMPLEMENT THE SOLUTION 153

Setting t h e Stage f o r Change 154
W h y W o n ' t It W o r k 154
C r e a t i n g an I m p l e m e n t a t i o n Plan 154
OUTLINE THE PLAN 154
EXPAND THE OUTLINE 155
CHECK YOUR PLAN 157
Implementing Strategically 158

M a j o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n Challenges 158
HuMmAN (PeopLe-RELATED) ProsLems 158
Process (PROGRAM-RELATED) Prostems 159
STRUCTURAL (SETTING-RELATED) PRostems 159
INSTITUTIONAL (PROGRAM-RELATED OR SETTING-RELATED)
Prostems 159
Contents xxi
Stages in I m p l e m e n t a t i o n 160
Mobilization 160
Implementation Proper 160

Institutionalization 160
Chapter Summary 161
C h a p t e r 11 M O N I T O R OUTPUTS 165
W h a t Is M o n i t o r i n g ? 166
Functions o f M o n i t o r i n g 166
Compliance 167
Accounting 167
Auditing 167
Explanation 168
W h a t Should We Track? 168
Functions, Data, and Data Sources 168
Three Key M o n i t o r i n g Questions 170
Why SHouto We TRACK THESE DATA? = 171
WHO SHOULD TRACK THE REQUIRED Data? 171
How OrTen SHoutp We Track THese DATA? 171
M e t h o d s o f Tracking 172
Establishing Baselines 172
Determining W h a t Change Is Being Measured 173
MeasureMeNT Across SPACE AND TIME 173
Units of ANALYsis 173
Disptayinc Data 173
Chapter Summary 174
C h a p t e r 12 E V A L U A T E OUTCOMES 178
xxii Contents
Evaluating Versus M o n i t o r i n g 179

Focus o f E v a l u a t i o n 179
Types a n d Purposes o f Evaluation 180

Formative Evaluations 180
Summative Evaluations 180
Users o f E v a l u a t i o n 181
Approaches t o Evaluation 181

Methods o f Evaluation 182
C o m p o n e n t s o f an E v a l u a t i o n Plan 182
Analytical Considerations 183
C o m m o n M e t h o d s o f Assessment 184
RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIALS 184
Direct CONTROLLED TRIALS 185
QUASI-EXPERIMENTS 185
MarcHing 185
BEFORE-AND-AFTER COMPARISONS 185
WITH-AND-WitHouT ComPARISONS 186
NONEXPERIMENTAL Direct ANALYSIS 186
NONEXPERIMENTAL INDIRECT ANALYSIS 186
P o l i t i c a l Considerations 186
Chapter Summary 187
C h a p t e r 13 C O N C L U D I N G REMARKS 192
Remember W h y We Do Policy Analysis 192
Policy Analysis and You 193
Policy Analysis and t h e Community 193
Policy Analysis and Change 194
Policy Analysis and Evaluation 194
The Steps in Policy Analysis Using an Existing Policy Example 194
E l e m e n t a r y a n d S e c o n d a r y E d u c a t i o n A c t (ESEA) 194
DEFINE THE PROBLEM 195
MAKE THE Case 195
EstastisH Your Drivine VaLues 195
Devetop ALTERNATIVES 196
WEIGH THE OPTIONS 196
Contents xxiii
Make RECOMMENDATIONS 196
PeRSUADE YOUR AUDIENCE 196

IMPLEMENT THE SOLUTION 196 !
M o n i t o r Outputs 196
EVALUATE Outcomes 196 j
Chapter Summary 197

PULLOUT FIELD G U I D E FOR E D U C A T I O N A L LEADERS: S U M M A R Y

OF CHECKLIST OF E A C H STEP OF THE POLICY A N A L Y T I C A L PROCESS
References 201
Index 207
Laying the Groundwork
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After reading t h i s chapter, y o u w i l l be able to:
= Describe w h y policy analysis is i m p o r t a n t for education leaders
# List the basic principles of policy analysis

« Describe various types of policy analysis and recognize their application(s)
« Identify the key philosophies of education and their basic principles
# Give an example of how philosophy has shaped worldviews
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
You are the new U.S. secretary o f education, You have received contrasting reports on
the state o f education in the United States. Sorne herald it as the most accessible system;
others lament reduced opportunities for vulnerable student populations. Some point to
the dominance o f U.S. universities on the international stage; others complain about the
low ranking of the United States in the report of Trends in International Mathematics and
Science Study. Some complain that the standards o f education are too low; others worry
about the repercussions o f high-stakes testing. Some point to the high rate of return on in-
vestment if students participate in some postsecondary options; students o f higher educa-
tion complain that they are burdened with debt that they incurred attending postsecond-
ary institutions. Some college a n d university presidents want to h o l d secondary schools
more accountable for what high school graduates know. On the other hand, they worry
that the federal government is expanding its oversight of colleges to include defining what
4 credit hour means, Some complain about too much federal involvement; others want
more. Some business leaders decry the cost o f training high school a n d college graduates
2 Chapter1 ¢ Laying the Groundwork
entering the workforce. Others worry that schools are not educating citizens but trainin,9
cogs in a machine.
What do you think? Is there a problem in education? If you think there is a problem, what
do you do?
W H Y SHOULD LEADERS S T U D Y POLICY A N A L Y S I S ?
Players on t h e Leadership Landscape
T h e l e a d e r s h i p landscape is f i l l e d w i t h c o m p l i c a t i o n s . L e a d e r s m u s t v o i c e ideas, cony,

d r e a m s , create w o r k a b l e ideals, establish goals, s o l v e p r o b l e m s , o f f e r alternatives, and get
o t h e r s to agree. B y d e f i n i t i o n , y o u are n o t m u c h o f a l e a d e r i f n o o n e is f o l l o w i n g . The
c o m p l e x i t i e s o f l e a d e r s h i p are p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p a r e n t i n e d u c a t i o n p o l i c y , w h e r e leadership
takes several f o r m s , f r o m the teacher i n the c l a s s r o o m to the p r i n c i p a l o f a b u i l d i n g , to the
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s o f a schoo! district, to the s c h o o l b o a r d m e m b e r s to w h o m t h e y answer (or
not), t o the p o l i c y m a k e r s at the state level o r t h e i r peers i n t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t . A d d to
t h i s list m e m b e r s o f t h i n k tanks, c o m m u n i t y g r o u p s , s t u d e n t s o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , funders
o f f o u n d a t i o n s , n o n g o v e r n m e n t a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a n d p a r e n t s , a n d o n e hasa sense of how
c h a l l e n g i n g i t is f o r e d u c a t i o n leaders to p e r s u a d e others to f o l l o w a r e c o m m e n d e d course.
W h a t Policy Analysis Can D o

Different policies are often tried repeatedly because of their popularity rather than their ef-
fectiveness. One must also contend w i t h policy revision, policy rejection, and policy cyni-
cism on the part of key players needed to enact, support, and promote change. Broaden
the perspective even further b y including those stakeholders p r i m a r i l y interested in higher
education, education for sustainable development, and international contexts, and one
may wonder w h y education systems are not more chaotic. Even more surprising is the
fact that certain leaders are able to forge agreements that lead to substantive transforma-
tion or improvement i n the field. Think of the w o r k of Geoffrey Canada, w h o created the
Harlem Children Zone to end the cycle of generational poverty b y addressing the needs of
the entire community, not just the child i n school. Reflect on the dream of Wendy Kopp,
w h o created Teach for America based on her senior thesis at Princeton. She believed that
a strong cadre of high-quality teachers w o u l d improve student achievement and that the
teaching profession could attract top college graduates if it had the appropriate structure.
Consider even more mundane changes. A principal of a small public elementary school in
Minneapolis w h o persuaded parents to pick up their children i n a location different from
the one that they had been using for several years. The principal was concerned about the
safety of the students w i t h the increase in the n u m b e r o f parents picking up their children.
The principal w o r r i e d that the original pickup location had become too crowded. Being
able to persuade others to embrace change and to do things differently is an important
skill for leaders. You have a p o w e r f u l tool w h e n you are able to rebut the phrase, ?That's
h o w we have always done it? or ?That?s not h o w w e do things around here.?
The R o l e o f P e r s u a s i o n
Some may argue that there is not much need for persuasion in education settings
because education organizations are hierarchical structures. They think that leaders
3
C h a p t e1
r * Laying the Groundwork
of thesei n s t i t u t i o n s a r e able to r e l y on the a u t h o r i t y of t h e i r p o s i t i o n to get t h i n g s

done. H o w e v e r , w h i l e m a n y o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the e d u c a t i o n setting h a v e clear t i t u -
lar heads, the s y s t e m i t s e l f is r a t h e r open. T h a t is, each e n t i t y w i t h i n the e d u c a -
tion arena is r e l a t i v e l y i n d e p e n d e n t : Teachers close t h e i r doors a n d teach; p r i n c i p a l s
emphasize some d i r e c t i v e s a n d d o w n p l a y others; d i s t r i c t a n d state a d m i n i s t r a -
tors target t h e i r o w n p r i o r i t i e s ; a n d so on. This openness is even m o r e a p p a r e n t i n
higher education, w h e r e there is a h i g h degree o f a u t o n o m y a m o n g f a c u l t y and s t a f f
members i n those i n s t i t u t i o n s . B u y - i n a m o n g p e r s o n n e l is essential f o r m e a n i n g f u l
change to occur. T r y i n g to lead i n g l o b a l contexts also has its sets o f challenges as
jeaders f r o m m u l t i p l e o r g a n i z a t i o n s a n d societies t r y to g e t t h e i r voices h e a r d and
their dreams realized. D e s p i t e the theoretical a b i l i t y possessed b y o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
and g o v e r n m e n t a l leaders s i m p l y to tell people w h a t to do, to g e t t h i n g s done, lead-
ers still have to persuade.
Persuasion is n o t just b o r n o f rhetoric b u t also o f transparency a n d reflection.
How m a n y times have y o u madea d e c i s i o n that y o u have i n s t a n t l y regretted? These
regrets are often a c c o m p a n i e d b y the phrase, ?If o n l y I h a d k n o w n , ? y e t m a n y times
you did k n o w . Y o u k n e w the facts b u t m a y n o t h a v e realized that those facts w e r e
relevant, or y o u d i d n o t d o a g o o d job p e r s u a d i n g y o u r constituents o f the r e l e v a n c y
of those facts. This is n o t to say that the i n c l u s i o n of r e l e v a n t data w i l l a l w a y s lead to
the most f a v o r e d outcome. T h i s text is n o t about m a k i n g perfect decisions; i t is a b o u t
making t h o u g h t f u l , i n f o r m e d ones. It is about f o l l o w i n g a process o f decision m a k -
ing that a l l o w s y o u t o p e r s u a d e others and y o u r s e l f about the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f
your actions. Strong leaders are n o t o n l y able to e n v i s i o n a better place, t h e y are also
able to persuade others o f its existence, and t h r o u g h t h a t persuasion, they t r a n s f o r m
their e n v i r o n m e n t .
To t r a n s f o r m y o u r e n v i r o n m e n t , y o u need to be a reflective, action-oriented
leader. Y o u m u s t t h i n k about the needs o f the organization o r c o m m u n i t y that y o u
lead, and you do w h a t y o u m u s t to a l l o w y o u r ideas f o r i m p r o v e m e n t o r sustainability
to become a reality. Consequently, y o u r d a i l y context requires y o u to be engulfed i n
policies, either reacting to them o r creating them. After all, w h a t is p o l i c y b u ta call to
action? You w i l l f i n d that if people understand the rationale for y o u r call a n d the basis
for your decision, they are m o r e likely to i m p l e m e n t y o u r ideas. This text p r o v i d e s a
methodological scheme that allows you to develop a system o f decision m a k i n g that
enables you to j u s t i f y y o u r actions, n o t j u s t rationalize them. Justifying y o u r actions is a
function of leadership; policy analysis allows y o u to f u l f i l l that function.
USERS OF POLICY A N A L Y S I S
Administrators, policymakers, and academics m a y be interested i n different stages o f

the policy analysis process a n d m a y n o t f i n d each aspect of the process e q u a l l y rel-
evant to their day-to-day lives o r responsibilities. Practitioners, f o r instance, m a y n o t
want to focus their efforts on the definition o f the policy p r o b l e m if they have to accept
the problematic condition that t h e y have already been given. They m a y argue that the
formulators o f policies do n o t seek their i n p u t i n i d e n t i f y i n g w h a t is w r o n g w i t h the
world and the reason that the problem exists, I w o u l d argue that even w i t h a p r o b l e m
already defined, practitioners still have an i m p o r t a n t role to play i n selecting a m o n g the
multiple ways that the c o n d i t i o n can be alleviated (e.g., K i n g d o n , 1995). For example,
4 Chapter 1 ¢ Laying the Groundwork
it m a t t e r s t h a t e d u c a t i o n l e a d e r s i n M a s s a c h u s e t t s h a v e c r e a t e d d i f f e r e n t re
Sulations in
response t o f e d e r a l m a n d a t e s t h a n t h e i r peers i n A l a b a m a . A k e y p a r t o f Pursuing the
a p p r o p r i a t e s t r a t e g y is to h a v e a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f w h a t c a u s e d t h e p r oblem in the
f i r s t place.
If w e look at the N o C h i l d L e f t Behind A c t o f 2001,! w e m a y see that this is a pol.
icy in w h i c h federal policymakers have defined at least t w o problems: (1) Students

are n o t all p e r f o r m i n g p r o f i c i e n t l y , and (2) different student groups present marked
differences i n their performance. A c c o r d i n g to the law, educators have the Tesponsi-
b i l i t y of addressing those ills and e l i m i n a t i n g m a r k e d differences i n the proficiencies
of d i f f e r e n t s t u d e n t g r o u p s so that all students p e r f o r m at p r o f i c i e n t levels. What
actions can and s h o u l d education practitioners take to f u l f i l l that responsibility? The
response o f administrators to this question is aligned to the action-oriented nature
o f the policy analysis process. For practitioners, this text m a y be particularly useful
because it provides guidance i n the systematic f r a m i n g of strategies and assistance in
m a k i n g the case for the p o l i c y path chosen. This text also facilitates the communica-
tion of ideas and the delineation of tasks that are useful i n the implementation and
evaluation of policies.
Policymakers are also action-oriented i n their focus on the policy process; how-
ever, the actions they seek o r require must be rooted i n h o w they see the problem and
i n their understanding of that problem. For policymakers, the most important aspect
of the policy process may be i n their definition and structuring of the problem and the
flexibility that they give administrators to pursue solutions. The guidance provided in
this book w i l l be particularly useful for policymakers because it emphasizes and guides
the appropriate structuring of policy problems. Appropriate problem structuring is es-
sential in solving the right problem and in conducting effective policy evaluation (e.g.,
Dunn, 2004; Patton & Sawicki, 1993).
A s education scholars, we m a y focus more on understanding policy analysis than
on the development of appropriate actions. If w e divorce theory from practice, how-
ever, we lose key elements of the phenomenon and its underlying construct. This limits
our understanding and our ability to add to the knowledge in the field. While scholars
m a y be more interested i n resolving a knowledge gap, doing so requires an examina-
tion of the realities in which policy actions take place.
W h e t h e r y o u are i n the school b u i l d i n g , i n the p o l i c y arena, o r i n academe, ana-
l y z i n g p o l i c y is fraught w i t h challenges f o r a variety o f reasons. For instance,p r o b -
lems are often not w e l l defined (e.g., Heck, 2004; D u n n , 2004). Even if they are well
defined, we m a y n o t come up w i t h a perfect solution f o r resolving them. A n d even
i f w e have a perfect solution i n theory, i n practice, w e m a y face m a n y h i g h hurdles
p u t t i n g the solution i n place. That is, defining the p r o b l e m w e l l does n o tnecessarily
mean i m p l e m e n t i n g its s o l u t i o n appropriately. We do n o t have absolute standards to
consider w h e n w e decide w h i c h conditions are problematic and w h i c h are not. There
is often no d o m i n a n t solution, even if w e are i n agreement about w h a t the problem
?The title of this act is misleading because President George W. Bush signed it into law in January 2002.
However, the act itself indicates that its short title should be the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (see P.L.
107-110?Jan. 8, 2002 115 Stat. 1425). Given its official title, that is the way I chose to describe it in the text,
with the acknowledgment that it was not actually signed until the subsequent year.
Chapter 1 © Laying the G r o u n d w o r k
js, A l l w e have are guidelines that p r o v i d e o u r c o n s t i t u e n t s ? a s well as o u r s e l v e s ?

with a roadmap to the decisions t h a t w e have made a n d the reasons that w e chose
t h ep a t h s that w e did.
WHY USE THIS TEXT?

This text has an educational and practical focus geared toward the actual policy an-
alytical method rather than the policy-making process. Its practical applications are
rounded i n a strong theoretical f r a m e w o r k that is readable and readily applicable for
education practitioners a n d policy leaders. It includes guidelines f o r analysis that are
especially geared t o w a r d practicing or aspiring education administrators; thus, it in-
corporates more of an explanation of the u n d e r l y i n g economic focus than traditional
policy analytical texts. This text is a practical guide to policy analysis; it includes strong
education content a n d step-by-step guidance, from problem definition to implementa-
tion and evaluation. This text is methodological i n focus and educational in context.
Its reliance on a step-by-step method to policy analysis, accompanied b y education v i -
gnettes, makes this text unique to the field of policy studies. N o w that y o u have a sense
of w h y you should s t u d y p o l i c y analysis and w h y this text is helpful i n that endeavor,
let us cover some basic points.
W H A T IS P O L I C Y A N A L Y S I S ?
A Brief D e f i n i t i o n
Policy analysis is a method of inquiry, a process b y w h i c h w e try to make the w o r l d

a better place. It is a journey that begins w i t h identifying something w r o n g w i t h o u r
surroundings, and it ends w i t ha resolution o r alleviation of that problematic condi-

tion. Policy analysis is analogous to the change process described in Duke (2004), w h i c h
involves both an understanding and achievement of educational change. The step-by-
step approach to policy analysis offered i n this text calls for both action and reflection,
and it can serve as a useful guide f o r education leaders at all levels of the policymak-
ing process?teachers, principals, policymakers, researchers, and evaluators?as w e l l
as scholars in the field. While the guide offered here is linear and described in steps,
it is important to recognize that the process is organic and is often iterative i n reality
(Bardach, 2009; Duke, 2004),
Why P o l i c y A n a l y s i s ?
Problems exist if y o u r ideal differs f r o m the reality y o u face. Thus, problems arise
whena specific set o f circumstances does n o t meet y o u r desires o r expectations,
or if it conflicts w i t h y o u r values. Because people's ideals differ, the same set o f
facts may present itself as d i f f e r e n t problems to different people. H o w e v e r , n o t all
Problematic c o n d i t i o n s rise to the level of p o l i c y problems. The fact that I a m n o t
an independently w e a l t h y person m a y be p r o b l e m a t i c f o r me, b u t this fact does n o t
warrant the consideration o f the collective. That is, n o t all negative conditions are
worthy o f being addressed b y leaders. Thus, the good news is that y o u need n o t
trouble y o u r s e l f to create u t o p i a , w h e r e e v e r y t h i n g is perfect. Focus y o u r efforts
6 Chapter 1 ¢ Laying the G r o u n d w o r k
on solvable conditions that have substantive consequences f o r the c o m m u n i t y th

you lead. at
Policy problems are n o t static and may change over time, across places, andamon,
different policymakers. Heck (2004) notes that ?policy problems b y nature are publi
consequential, complex, dominated by uncertainty, and affected b y disagreement abou,
the goals to be pursued? (p. 8). Policy analysis is the process by w h i c h one can bridge
the divide between what is and w h a t should be. Scholars agree that policya n a l y s i s
about making a choice among alternatives; however, w h a t one considers apreferreg
option is a subjective decision. Where there is subjectivity, there is a role for Politics
to determine whose values rule. While I recognize that policy analysis is not aneutral
endeavor, there are right and wrong ways to approaching analysis. Consequently,t h e
purpose of this text is not to give you the right answers to policy problems but to put
you on the right path f o r addressing them.
As education leaders, we constantly face situations that are less than ideal. For ex-
ample, if you were the president of a college, you m a y w o n d e r if your status according
to U.S. News and World Report is good enough. Y o u may consider the graduation rates
o f students as being too low. You m a y w o n d e r about the richness of the courseoffer-
ings. Y o u m a y w o r r y about y o u r label as a ?party school.? You m a y hear al o t of com-
plaints about parking. You may even lament the climate i n w h i c h y o u r institution finds
itself. Some conditions you cannot change and some conditions are n o t w o r t hchanging
even if you could. Consequently, a key component o f policy analysis is distinguishing
among a condition, a policy problem and a policy issue. Determining what conditions
are w o r t h y of being defined as problems, and w h a t problems are w o r t h y policy issues
depend on the values that you bring to the fore. Conditions simply describe the world
around you. Policy problems are those conditions that you do n o t like and you think
can be changed, should be changed, and should be changed using the resources of the
collective. Policy issues are p o l i c y problems f o r w h i c h there is disagreement on the
appropriate solution. This distinction is an i m p o r t a n t underpinning of the process and
underlies the discussion throughout the text.
The G o a l o f P o l i c y A n a l y s i s
The goal of p o l i c y analytical research is to provide an analysis of fundamental social

problems and to offer practical alternatives for solving them. Policy analysis arms lead-
ers and other policymakers w i t h facts i n order to make rational decisions on the best
w a y to alleviate a policy issue. That is, policy analysis supplies practical, actionable in-
formation. The process is descriptive w i t h prescriptive results. It presumes certain rela-
tionships, is creative i n its identification of problems and alternatives, and is grounded
i n plausible beliefs (Dunn, 2004). The purpose of this discussion is to set the stage for
understanding the process of policy analysis by p r o v i d i n g an overview of the process.
TYPES OF POLICY A N A L Y S I S
Several schools o f thought exist in the field of policy, and w e often group policy research
based on the different perspectives that dominate the analytical process. These perspec-
tives focus on the t i m i n g of the analysis, the purpose of the analysis, the disciplinary
perspective underlying the analysis, and the transparency of the analysis.
7
C h a p t e1r * Laying the Groundwork
Ex Post a n d Ex A n t e A n a l y s i s
This g r o u p i n g of p o l i c y research is based on w h e t h e r w e conduct analysis w i t h the

assumption that the chosen p o l i c y has already been or has not yet been i m p l e m e n t e d
(Odden & Picus, 2009; Patton & Sawicki, 1993). If the p o l i c y has already been u n d e r -
taken, we refer to these studies as ex p o s t analysis. Ex p o s t studies presume that the
m a j o r taskst h a tl i e ahead are the m o n i t o r i n g and evaluation of the outcomes o f previ-
o u s l y made decisions. W o r k done b y analysts i n the federal G o v e r n m e n t A c c o u n t a b i l i t y
Office (GAO) typifies this category. A n o t h e r example is the feedback offered b y p r i n -
cipals on the progress made b y teachers i n their schools. H o w e v e r , education leaders
need to lead, and consequently they also need to be proactive rather than s i m p l y react
to policies already i n place. Consequently, m a n y education leaders w i l l find it useful to
conduct ex ante analysis.
Ex ante a n a l y s i s takes place before the a c t u a l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f p o l i c y . B y
relying on ex ante analysis, w e can e x a m i n e h o wa possible s o l u t i o n w o u l d w o r k i n
theory and can a n t i c i p a t e and address p o t e n t i a l challenges to successful r e s o l u t i o n
of the p o l i c y issue. Ex ante analysis a l l o w s one the f r e e d o m to e x p l o r e all stages
of the p o l i c y analysis process a n d the p o t e n t i a l to t h i n k b e y o n d the s o l u t i o n s t h a t
have already been tried. H o w e v e r , it is n o t e n o u g h s i m p l y to dream. W h i l e I en-
courage students t o t h i n k creatively, t h e y m u s t be clear h o w t h e i r r e c o m m e n d a -
tions w i l l address some o f the c o n s t r a i n t s t h a t exist a n d n o t s i m p l y w i s h t h e m
away (e.g., Bardach, 2009).
Forecasting, Prescribing, M o n i t o r i n g , E v a l u a t i n g
We may also g r o u p policy analytical research b y the p r i m a r y aim of the analysis. D u n n

(2004) and H e c k (2004) argue, f o r example, that the p o l i c y analysis process consists o f
four key actions: forecasting, prescribing, monitoring, and evaluating.
Forecasting allows policy scholars to make assertions about the future, either by
making projections based on data, predictions based on theory, or conjectures based on
intuition. Economists tend to use the first two methods, while storytellers and futurists
tend to rely on the last one. Because ex ante analysis is, by its very nature, future-oriented,
there needs to be clear and dependable ways of coming to a conclusion of likely outcomes
of particular actions. Without being able to talk about the future in a meaningful way, we
abdicate one of our major responsibilities as education leaders.
Prescribing or recommending policy must be grounded in our expectations of the
future. In policy analysis, we assume that we will prescribe adoption and implementa-
tion of the policies that balance everyone?s concerns the best and recommend rejection
of those policies that do not.
In policy analytical research, m o n i t o r i n g requires the collection of data that w i l l
allow evaluation of whether the chosen strategy led to alleviation o r resolution o f the
problem defined. M o n i t o r i n g is essentially a descriptive process that deals w i t h w h a t
is. For example, d i d scores go u p , d i d they go d o w n , o r d i d they stay the same? D o
Baps i n performance exist between o r among different student groups? W h i l e w h a t
one chooses to m o n i t o r is tied to the policy issue and i n this w a y is grounded i n values,
t h e monitoring process itself is empirical, n o t normative. That is, m o n i t o r i n g allows for
factual assertions based on data (empirical) and is not designed to be the last w o r d o n a
Program?s success or lack thereof (normative).
Chapte1
r * L a y i n g the G r o u n d w o r k
E v a l u a t i n g goes b e y o n d m o n i t o r i n g . W h i l e m o n i t o r i n g p r o v i d e s informay
w h a t exists, e v a l u a t i o n requires considered assessment a b o u t w h e t h e r the o u n
are good o r bad. M u c h o f p o l i c y a n a l y t i c a l research has been i n the field of eval Comes
w h e r e analysts have passed j u d g m e n t o n the outcomes o f p a r t i c u l a rP o l i c i e s T h
j u d g m e n t s are largely based (or s h o u l d be) on t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the ese
a n d i n t e n d e d effects of a p a r t i c u l a r p o l i c y o r p r o g r a m . These results cant h e n men

assertions r e g a r d i n g the f u t u r e , a n d t h e cycle o f p o l i c y analysis is startedo n c e omn
( D u n n , 2004). again
These policy analytical actions coincide w i t h key aspects of theorizing, wh;

are to describe, explain, predict, and prescribe. Description entails the doctimenst
tion of facts and context. Explanation highlights connections between and amo a-
key variables and identifies patterns that may exist. These explanationsa n d i.
terns can inform w h a t we expect to happen i n the future (allowing predicticnsy
Based on these predictions, we can formulate prescriptions: We canPrescribecer.
tain actions i f we w a n t to obtain certain outcomes. Thus, the study of Policy analysis
offers a sound bridge on w h i c h to make the journey f r o m theory to practice,a n d
then back again.
R a t i o n a l Lens, S t r u c t u r a l Lens, a n d C u l t u r a l Lens
A n o t h e r w a y i n w h i c h to categorize research i n the field is the d i s c i p l i n a r y perspective

on w h i c h w e rely to define p o l i c y issues. H e c k (2004) notes t h a t there are three major
lenses: the rational, the structural, a n d the cultural. The r a t i o n a l lens emphasizes the
i m p o r t a n c e o f the i n t e r n a l m o t i v a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l s i n the establishment and pursuit
of p o l i c y goals. The s t r u c t u r a l lens places an emphasis on structures a n d systems. It ex-
p l i c i t l y recognizes the p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t o f institutions on the actions o f i n d i v i d u a l s and
the p o l i c y outcomes produced. The c u l t u r a l lens emphasizes relationships. Culturalists
a c k n o w l e d g e the context of policies a n d the importance o f e n v i r o n m e n t ,relationships,
time, a n d values i n creating that context (Heck, 2004).
These three perspectives certainly overlap, but the crux of the problem would be
viewed differently from each one, and thus the solutions offered by proponents of each
perspective may also differ. For example, education leaders may agree that an impor-
tant policy issue is that ?too many students in higher education do not earna bachelor?s
degree in 4 years.? From a rational perspective, the reason for that problem may be that
insufficient incentives exist for students to finish on time (e.g., Hanushek, Heckman, &
Neal, 2002). Froma structural perspective, the root of the problem might be insufficient
organizational structures that would allow students to finish w i t h i n 4 years because
classes are filled, and so on (e.g., Alexander, 2004). A cultural perspective might claim
that insufficient relationships and bonds are formed between students and the broader
university community (e.g., Tinto, 1997).
Transparency Versus Objectivity
The definition o f policy issues and resulting alternatives offered are grounded in val-
ues, so i t is important to note from the outset that the policy analysis process is not
objective. This does not mean that i t should not be grounded in data and logical argu-
ments. I t is the subjectivity of the policy analytical process that makes it all the more
C h a p t e1r * Laying the Groundwork 9
i m p o r t a n t t o g r o u n d a s s e r t i o n s a n d t o m a k e c l e a r f o r the r e a d e r s t h e c h o i c e s b e i n g
m a d e and why.
In the past, researchers sought i n vain to make the policy analysis process
more objective. However, the importance of underlying values in both the defi-
nition of thep r o b l e m and the solutions sought means that policy scholars have
increasingly rejected the characterization of policy analysis as objective or that
it should be (e.g., Dunn, 2004; Heck, 2004). Instead, the subjectivity i n conduct-
ing policy analysis should be emphasized. The key is not to be objective but to be
transparent, which means making the assumptions and the values underlying your
decision explicit. Thus, an important benefit of the process is a clear rationale for
conclusions: from the definition of the problem to the alternatives recommended
to resolve it, to the strategy chosen to put the solution in place, to conclusions re-
a r d i n g w h e t h e r the p o l i c y w o r k e d . I n p o l i c y analysis, w e need to be clear about
the relationships w e are assuming. O u r assumptions r e g a r d i n g p r e s u m e d r e l a t i o n -
ships explain who, w h a t , w h e n , where, w h y , h o w , and w i t h w h a t consequences an
event occurs a n d h o w l i k e l y w e are to r e c o m m e n d a n d accept p a r t i c u l a r solutions.
In discussing p o l i c y - r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n f o r research, D u n n (2004) raises f i v e i m -
p o r t a n t questions: (1) W h a t is t h e n a t u r e o f the p r o b l e m ? (2) W h a t present and past
policies have been established to address the problem? (3) H o w valuable are these
outcomes i n s o l v i n g the p r o b l e m ? (4) W h a t p o l i c y alternatives are available to ad-
dress the p r o b l e m a n d w h a t are t h e i r l i k e l y f u t u r e outcomes? and (5) W h a t alterna-
tives should be acted u p o n to solve the problem? Policymakers a n d o t h e r leaders
grapple w i t h the answers to these questions. T h e i r responses reflect their values,
the subject of the n e x t section.
PHILOSOPHIES OF E D U C A T I O N
Leaders do not define problems or propose solutions blindly or in a vacuum.

Whether they do i t consciously or not, they bring w i t h them a host of experiences
and expertise that shape their view of the world. Their assumptions are grounded
in beliefs regarding the nature of reality. When U.S. federal policymakers enacted
the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, their explicit assumption was that all children
can perform at specified levels and if they do not, it is the fault of key profession-
als in the system. When federal administrators recommend increased oversight of
vocational, nondegree, career-training programs, the assumption is that students
and the federal government are bearing too much of the risks of funding these post-
secondary programs. On a global level, when leaders of the World Bank invest in
education, it is based on their assumption that education is an important tool for
ending global poverty.
This section orients readers to the policy analysis process by focusing explicitly
on values. The rest of this discussion describes various philosophies of education, ethi-
cal foundations, and accompanying w o r l d v i e w s . Part of this discussion entails an ex-
amination o f intrinsic and extrinsic values i n order to stimulate y o u r t h i n k i n g on the
important role that values play i n y o u r analysis of public policy. That is, values and
philosophy influence one?s definition of problems, recommendations of actions, imple-
mentation of policy, and the evaluation of that policy. '
10 C h a p t e 1r ¢ Laying the Groundwork
Values: Cornerstone o f W o r l d v i e w s a n d P h i l o s o p h i e s
A c c o r d i n g to Ellis (1998), no policy can be j u s t i f i e d w i t h o u t both a value

be);
a factual belief on h o w the value i n question can be achievedeffectively, He

asserts that we can categorize our values as being intrinsic or extrinsic. With er
sic values, we want a particular outcome for its o w n sake. W i t h extrinsic yal inty
want a particular outcome f o r w h a t w e think that it can get us. A s you readthe We 1,
these definitions, think about what that m a y mean for us as i n d i v i d u a l sa n d ?ough

ers i n the education arena. For example, do w e valued i v e r s i t y because a lead.
that d i v e r s i t y i n schools is good i n and of itself, or do w e valued i v e r s i t y be
we t h i n k that it can i m p r o v e o u r standing i n an increasingly globalized worlaw®®
w e choose the first response, diversity is an intrinsically held value; if w © choo, d? If
latter response, w e think of diversity as an extrinsic value. O u r answer tot h i s , the
other value-laden questions reflect our w o r l d v i e w and h o w w e organize our in and
sic versus extrinsic values. tin.
Brief Overview of Worldviews
Ellis (1998) lists six basic types of value systems or worldviews. They are egoistic he.
donism, utilitarianism, distributive justice, retributive justice, personalism, andethical
relativism, For leaders, what is important to note is the different Priorities and intrinsic
values dominating each view. This discussion helps us to reflect on our own choices and
to clarify what people w o u l d be w i l l i n g to give up i f values come into conflict with each
other, as they often do i n complex arenas such as schools,
The brief discussion of the w o r l d v i e w s that I p r o v i d e here does not do justice
to the thorough treatise p r o v i d e d b y Ellis (1998) i n his full-length text. For ourp u r -
poses, however, w h a t is i m p o r t a n t is an understanding o f the choices Proponents of
various w o r l d v i e w s are l i k e l y to make if they have to choose among a variety of op-
tions f o r resolving a p r o b l e m . I t is especially i m p o r t a n t to be aware of these choices
because p o l i c y analysis becomes relevant o n l y w h e n a choice is required among
p o l i c y alternatives.
For those subscribing to the view of egoistic hedonism, the priority is thepolicy
that increases the well-being o f the i n d i v i d u a l making the decision. As leaders of an
organization, you may seek out those policies that advance y o u r career, augment your
power, o r enhance y o u r prestige. In u t i l i t a r i a n i s m , the priority is the policy that leads
to the greatest good for the greatest n u m b e r of individuals in the c o m m u n i t y consid-
ered. Utilitarian leaders favor policies that maximize scores, optimize overall achieve-
ment, and lead to h i g h averages. For the supporter of d i s t r i b u t i v e justice, the priority
should be to increase the well-being of those w h o receive the least benefit from the
present system. Leaders oriented toward distributive justice favor programs that ben-
efit the m o s t vulnerable members of the community. They prefer policies that enhance
opportunities for those at the lowest end of the performance spectrum, mitigate the
challenges o f poverty, and focus on the needs of those most at risk of failing. The pro-
ponent o f r e t r i b u t i v e justice favors policies that strengthen or establish connections
between action and consequence. Leaders guided b y retributive justice favor policies
that are incentives-based, tie effort to outcomes, and tie merit to reward. Leaders ad-
vocating p e r s o n a l i s m favor policies that target the self-actualization of individuals
11
1 * Laying the Groundwork
Chapter
and the enlightenment of society. Leaders who advocate ethical relativism reject the
belief that one g u i d i n g p r i n c i p l e w o r k s u n i v e r s a l l y w e l l o r t h a t one p r i o r i t y s h o u l d be
p r i v i l e g e d o v e r another.
Eight Common Values

According to F o w l e r (2009), m a n y o f us share the same values; what often distinguishes
us is how w e p r i o r i t i z e these values. She suggests eight key values that w e all care
about; w e just care about them d i f f e r e n t l y , w h i c h leads to d i f f e r e n t w o r l d v i e w s a n d
p h i l o s o p h i c a lo r i e n t a t i o n s .
The first of these v a l u e s is i n d i v i d u a l i s m , w h i c h reflects a v a l u e f o r the i n d i -
vidual h u m a n b e i n g a n d can be expressed i n terms o f an i n d i v i d u a l reaching his o r
her own personal pinnacle (self-actualizing) o r in the i n d i v i d u a l e c o n o m i c f r e e d o m s
that are a l l o w e d . Leaders o r i e n t e d t o w a r d egoistic h e d o n i s m , personalism, a n d u t i l i -
tarianism w o u l d h a v e this v a l u e h i g h o n their list of priorities. The second v a l u e is
order, i n w h i c h there is r e c o g n i t i o n that society needs rules to f u n c t i o n a n d to bal-
ance the d i f f e r e n t needs of t h e p e o p l e w i t h i n it. Leaders often v a l u e o r d e r f o r the
stability it p r o v i d e s so t h a t they can p u r s u e o t h e r goals. For instance, the establish-
ment of zero-tolerance policies w a s to ensure the safety o f students. Research studies
showed that c h i l d r e n learn b e t t e r w h e n t h e y are n o t i n a chaotic atmosphere o r l i v i n g
in fear. The increased use of school climate on school r e p o r t cards demonstrates the
increasing a t t e n t i o n t h a t society is g i v i n g to the connection b e t w e e n o r d e r and the
learning e n v i r o n m e n t .
The n e x t three values, l i b e r t y , f r a t e r n i t y , a n d e q u a l i t y , are taken f r o m the
French Revolution, w h e r e the f r e e d o m , b r o t h e r h o o d , and e q u a l i t y of the m e m b e r s
of the c o m m u n i t y w e r e prized. Fowler categorizes these three values as democratic
values and says that f r a t e r n i t y is different f r o m equality i n that there is a sense o f a
brotherhood rather t h a n e q u a l i t y f o r the c o m m u n i t y at large. She defines f r e e d o m
in its literal sense as h a v i n g no restriction on action. She equates e q u a l i t y w i t h eq-
uity, where it refers p r i m a r i l y to members of society h a v i n g equality o f o p p o r t u n i t y .
For example, proponents of d i s t r i b u t i v e justice w o u l d l i k e l y p r i o r i t i z e f r a t e r n i t y a n d
equality as top values to pursue.
The next three values, economic growth, efficiency, and quality, are grouped
together under economic values, where the growth of the economy, efficiencies, and
high-quality outcomes are favored. Prioritizing economic growth suggests that leaders
will favor policies that lead to an overall increase in gross domestic product, an increase
in personal income, low rates of unemployment and inflation, and other indicators of a
strong economy. Efficiency refers to absence of waste; leaders would propose policies
that give the most bang for a buck, even if that may result in unequal distributions of
wealth or other desired resources. Quality is a nebulous term. Fowler explicitly ties it
to economic values, but it could be construed to have a broader meaning. For example,
federal policymakers use this term repeatedly by requiring that there be a ?high-qual-
ity? teacher in every classroom.
How you prioritize these and other values provides a useful roadmap to the pos-
sible solutions you feel are available to solve the problems identified. The key philoso-
phies undergirding education policy may include all of the above values, albeit in dif-
ferent order of significance.
uo
paseq
Jenpiaipul
|
saintjod
yeuy
sayaud
s1t
yueyodul Yo
YW
UaYM
SANjea
go
a Eo
FO
ay}
*AuNWWOD
si
Jayagq
Aapo0s5
0}
ay
JO ?sUOTDe
SNOOWaW
JUaWuUa}YBiUa
O}
Yul]
sa1n1Od
SADI}Od
spuemad
BOUeYUa
0}
ul
Jo
sow
paau
JO
quasaysip
?diay
sanjen
Jajeas6
Jeuosuad
SI
JO}
3$1
JURYOUI
JUBLORU
|Aw
aseo
yeu}
Ayead
Jo
$1
AaD0S
sJayjaq
A}
Aq
Je siyy
{je
JO
0) Of
Q
pue
ey
7s
Yim
Yes
Op
OL
ay)
A;nUap!
siyy
Buiaib
YrI4yM
A{QUAp!
Buluesus
yum
WoyNOX
JOU
NOK
as0Ds
Juawajeys
quawiajess
00
0}
yea
ay]
XIS
aes
Isaq
ayz
aseJNOA
aasBap
MOjag
JeYI
Bupyio/jy
mas
SANjeA
?semen
asooY>D
aquOSap
sso.De
HuizuayIeseyD
SULINJOD
??UORe}UaLIO
00}10)
ppe
?OL
ay,
YIM
01dn
ay}
?£4000
isn
?L?L
Burueaw
Anup!
?ajdwexa
NOA
SsoDe
Ajazajdwod
Mod?QuaWwaje}s
Ses02S
0)
Jo
aq
dn
ay}
?ZT
Up
406
LL
ay
xis
Ue)
?LE
(ZZ
ppe
SSADe
Suaquunu
SaquINU
Aue
JByIO
yey)
MOs
?01
?SPIOM
UOneUIGUIOD
JO}
ay}
saniunuoddo
|
Ayjeau
Aus
ase>
yeu}
Jo
si
sayaq
AaD0S YW
UaYM
SSO}
SaNjeA
|Au aul
uO sNd04
suoTMDe
yeu.
ase
Ayeas
|
sajaud
yeu
sajaud
sapyod
yeyI
sainyjod
ul
ay}
Au dU
ayy JO
azituydo
samod ?uoneziuefio
[[e42A0 SSQUaANIAYD
s i dup
Yo
Yo
aos
sayaq
Janaq
Ss!
Aapos
UsyM jaig
Yt o
poob
*ajoym ?sSySas3quy
Y
JeNPIpU!
sanjea
saNjen
UaYyM
1
51
St
3] 04
JO}0}
0}
JUeUOdUWI
queyoduil saptjod
sapijod
quawiine
|
Aus
yeuy
Ayea
aued Aw
suonoe
aoueape
12
It is i m p o r t a n t f o r m e t o t i s important f o r m e [tis important for me _It is i m p o r t a n t t o \tis important t o me ? It is m p o r t a n t t o m e
enhance my to improve the overall to improve the status me t h a t genius is t h a t everyone reaches t h a t everyone has a
prestige. standing of the group. of the disadvantaged. rewarded. his or her potential. say.
r o 2M i s t r e a
Schools should promote Schools should Schools should Schools should Schools should Schools should ;
individualized programs. promote high promote support promote tracking and p r o m o t e a program of promote a p r o g r a m in
performance services for those w h o classrooms based o n _ philosophy. the humanities.
standards. need them. skills.
F O R a a e
Others are helped if |

The greatest good for lambhelpedif | h e l p | One good t u m It is better t o be an Live and let live s h o u l d
help myself. the greatest number is others. deserves another isa unhappy human being be h o w w e live o u r
the w a y t o go. g o o d credo. than a happy pig. lives.
RA Rey B e gY Lea
Total column 1 Total column 2 Total column 3 Total column 4 Total column 5 Total column 6
° a al __s 4
After you have rated eachofthe six items acrossall seven rows, total the numbers for each column.
Interpretation:
I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 1, then y o u r values orientation is egoistic h e d o n i s m .

I f y o u r h i g h e s t c o l u m n t o t a l i s i n c o l u m n 2, t h e n y o u r v a l u e s o r i e n t a t i o n is u t i l i t a r i a n i s m .
If y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 3, then y o u r values orientation is d i s t r i b u t i v e justice. .
If y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 4, then y o u r values orientation is r e t r i b u t i v e justice.

I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 5, then y o u r values orientation is personalism.
If y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 6, then y o u r values orientation is ethical r e l a t i v i s m .
14 C h a p t e1r ¢ Laying the G r o u n d w o r k
Defining Philosophy
i
philosophy is t h a t i t i is a p u r s u i t f o rp e o p ! le i n berets
ets sippin
: ; it i
A common view of sipp coffee
and contemplatingt h e state of the w o r l d ; in other words,i t i s ana c t i v i t y fort h i n k e r s ,
not doers. Merriant-Webster?s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition, d e f i n e s Philosophy as
? 2 . . . bra search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly specy.
lative rather than observational means ¢: an analysis of the grounds of and concepts
s.? Both these definitions m a y give you the misguideq
expressing fundamental belief a S
;
belief that an understanding o f p h i l o s o p h y is t h e p u r v i e w of those w h o s i m p l y want
to think, that it is not something for action -oriented i nndd i v i d u a l s , perhaps like yourselg
You m a y even think that as a leader (practicing or aspiring), y o u do n o t have the lux
of such reflection. However, reflection is crucial to sound leadership. Whether you are
leading communities, classrooms, schools, districts, states, o r the nation, the groundin
of your philosophy influences the conditions that you identify as problematic and the
luti t h a t you f i n d palatable.
s n You cann
all things to all people. S i m i l a r l y , s c h o o l s c a n n o t b e a l l t h i n g s to
be F
You cannot
all people (Frase & Streshly, 2000; Spring, 2005). Choices are m a d e , p r i o r i t i e s are set, e
a n d y o u r p r i o r i t i z i n g of v a l ues gives important clues to y o u r philosophy of educa.

C ) >
tion. The h i s t o r y o f education i n the U n i t e d Statesp r o v i d e s a n i n t e r e s t i n g backdrop

to the p a n o p l y o f values that leaders e m p h a s i z e d o v e r time. P o l i c y m a k e r s have used
schools to achieve a v a r i e t y of g o a l s ? t o b u i l d leaders, to address p o v e r t y , to chal-
lenge the status quo, to preserve the status quo, to b u i l d self esteem, to sortc h i l d r e n ,
to s t i m u l a t e the economy, to develop a s k i l l e d w o r k f o r c e , to p r o m o t e an informed
c i t i z e n r y , and so on. H o w e v e r , resources are scarce and p o l i c y m a k e r s eventually
m u s t choose the focus o f e d u c a t i o n t h r o u g h the p r o g r a m s t h e y are w i l l i n g to fund,
W i t h the t i g h t e n i n g o f resources, the i n f l u e n c e o f p h i l o s o p h y a n d v a l u e s becomes
even m o r e p e r t i n e n t .
The discussion in this chapter may seem like one of those quizzes found in pop-
ular magazines. It presents the ideal of each category. If you find yourself drawn
primarily to the tenets of any one philosophy, this affinity shows that you have a
strong tendency to align yourself w i t h that particular group. Note, however, that the
labels themselves are not particularly i m p o r t a n t b u t are useful terms that summa-
rize certain priorities and understandings so that you are aware of the grounding of
your position. You may find traces of yourself in m u l t i p l e descriptions. The purpose
of this discussion is not to pigeonhole you o r have you w o r r y that you don?t fit any
one category. Rather, I want you to question the assumptions that you make and to
strengthen y o u r willingness and ability to engage others in useful discourse on how
society may be improved.
K e y P h i l o s o p h i e s a n d T h e i r Role i n E d u c a t i o n P o l i c y ?
IDEALISM. Do you think that there is a universal truth unbound by contextual re-
strictions? If you do, you might be an idealist. You are more likely to believe that
schools and education are about ideas and that they are separate from the broader
2 to de
:
?Much o f t h i s discussion is based on S a d o v n i k , C o o k s o n , a n d S e m e l (2001) a n d N o l l (2009).

C h a p t e1r ¢ L a y i n g the G r o u n d w o r k 15
co!
mmunity. You believe eternal ideas are the bases of knowledge and that absolute
ideals and universal standards should prevail. You reject the notion that truth is to
pe found in the world of matter or that schools should have a social agenda beyond
thetransmission of academick n o w l e d g e .R a t h e r , you advocate an abstract process
of discovering truth. In your mind, education should maximize abstract and higher-
order thinking. : .
If you are an idealist, you are less likely to promote actions that draw on social
agendas beyondt h e transmission of academic knowledge. You define your purpose
js ensuring that children can read and know the classics. You place little priority on
ging the neighborhood or family from which the children come. Your leadership is
marked by advocacy of education institutions that maximize abstract and higher-order
thinking. You probably have a poster of Plato hanging on your dorm wall or a book of
his quotes on your bookshelf.
Given this p h i l o s o p h y , y o u m a y consider that a problem w i t h schools is t h e i r
lack of a universal a p p r o a c h to k n o w l e d g e . For example, H u t c h i n s (1953, cited i n
Noll, 2009) asserts that the p r o b l e m w i t h schools stems f r o m ?the t r i v i a l i t y of that
[education] p r o d u c e d b y t h e doctrines o f adaptation, o f i m m e d i a t e needs, o f social
reform, or of the d o c t r i n e o f n o doctrine at all? (p. 13). I f you are a disciple o f this
h i l o s o p h y , y o u a r e l i k e l y t o base s o l u t i o n s t o the p r o b l e m o f s c h o o l i n g o n g r e a t e r
reliance o na t r a d i t i o n a l c u r r i c u l u m . T h i s is a c o m m o n t h e m e o f p r o p o n e n t s o f ? b a c k
to basics? a n d is r e f l e c t e d i n t h e U.S. N o C h i l d L e f t B e h i n d ( N C L B ) A c t . A s p e c t s o f
NCLB e p i t o m i z e an idealistic e d u c a t i o n p h i l o s o p h y because o f its a s s u m p t i o n a b o u t
the existence o f u n i v e r s a l k n o w l e d g e t h a t c a n b e s y s t e m a t i c a l l y m e a s u r e d t h r o u g h
the use o f s t a n d a r d i z e d tests. T h e g o a l o f 100 p e r c e n t s t u d e n t p r o f i c i e n c y a l s o s u g -
gests t h a t there is a b e l i e f t h a t k n o w l e d g e is a b s t r a c t , u n i v e r s a l , a n d o b t a i n a b l e b y
all. The rise o f c u r r i c u l u m s t a n d a r d s a n d t h e e x p a n s i o n o f h i g h - s t a k e s s t a n d a r d i z e d
tests across t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a r e p a r t i a l l y g r o u n d e d i n the r e e m e r g e n c e o f l e a d e r s
ascribing t o t h i s p h i l o s o p h y . K e n t u c k y p r o v i d e s a n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f i d e a l i s m u n -
d e r l y i n g e d u c a t i o n p o l i c y . I n t h a t state, each h i g h s c h o o l m u s t o f f e r a c o r e c u r r i c u -
lum of advanced placement, International Baccalaureate, d u a l e n r o l l m e n t , o r d u a l .
credit courses.
REALISM. If you believe in universal truth but are drawn to a systematic theory of
logic in which the world of matter is very important, you are probablya realist. You
base much of your assumptions of reality and human nature in the findings of na-
ture and the natural world. Your assumptions regarding knowledge are based on
the fixed laws of nature, and thus scientific investigation is an important cornerstone
for providing effective education to students. You lead with the understanding that
individuals should be able to use education to enhance their reasoning and to choose
a path of moderation.
Do you start y o u r quest f o r truth w i t h a logical m a p p i n g o f the w o r l d and then

test that understanding i n reality? Is Aristotle y o u r hero? I f so, y o u are s h o w i n g all
the signs of a realist. Y o u m a y also find yourself t r y i n g to balance the w o r l d of f a i t h
with the w o r l d of reason. U n l i k e idealists, y o u do not promote ideas f o r ideas? sake,
but in order to have a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the w o r l d a n d thus to i m p r o v e it.
You support c u r r i c u l a that are steeped in practical and applied courses like the sci-
ences and languages. W h i l e you w o u l d agree that schools are to develop the intellect
16 Chapter 1 ©
Laying the G r o u n d w o r k
of i n d i v i d u a l s f o r the good o f society, you do n o t t h i n k that c o m m u n i t i e s are an

extension o f schools, or vice versa. Like idealists, y o u advocate policies that main.
tain a w a l l between the c o m m u n i t y a n d schools, and schools should be touted as
places of learning. You are convinced that education is a matter of science and rigor
n o t b u i l d i n g esteem and holistic development. This p h i l o s o p h y is consistent w i t h
the emphasis on scientific-based research permeating m a n y recent federal educa.
tion policies, such as the requirement that quantitative analysis and traditional, ex.
p e r i m e n t a l l y designed research be used to assess the success o f federal programs,
It is also reflected i n the increased emphasis on math and science courses in both
state and federal legislation. For example, i n 2006, policymakers i n Utah recently
increased the n u m b e r of science classes needed f o r g r a d u a t i o n f r o m h i g h school,
In a d d i t i o n , this policy outlines core c u r r i c u l u m requirements f o r K - 1 2 ; it increases
the state m i n i m u m required units of credit f o r h i g h school g r a d u a t i o n i n language
arts from3 to 4, and i n mathematics and science f r o m 2 to 3, effective f o r students
g r a d u a t i n g i n the 2010-2011 school year.
PRAGMATISM. D o you t h i n k that education is more about the learning process than
it is about the learning outcome? I f y o u answered yes, y o u m i g h t be a pragmatist,
Y o u are n o t fond of the widespread use of high-stakes, standardized tests. Instead,
y o u are m o r e interested i n the application of contemporary issues in student learn-
i n g and rely on i n d u c t i v e approaches, where one goes f r o m the specific to the gen-
eral. I n this philosophy, a p r o b l e m sparks speculative thought, w h i c h leads to ac-
t i o n o f some sort, w h i c h in t u r n u l t i m a t e l y yields results. Y o u live b y the belief that
schools are intricately tied to student experiences and t h e i r b r o a d e r community.
Y o u are a fan of John Dewey, and y o u t h i n k he helped move education light years
ahead. Y o u are a f i r m supporter of lab schools, and y o u advocate t y i n g research,
pedagogy, and i n d i v i d u a l experience to the process of learning. Y o u are convinced
that e n v i r o n m e n t and experience are essential to the learning process (e.g., project
learning). In y o u r m i n d , the problem w i t h schools is their reliance on static rather
than on d y n a m i c and developing knowledge. Y o u favor a w o r k i n g relationship be-
tween school and society and m i g h t consider that the key to schooling is developing
k n o w l e d g e b y doing. .
Y o u v i e w children as organic beings whose course of s t u d y should reflect their

particular stage of development. You assert that ideas are n o t separate from social
condition and that schools should function as p r e p a r a t i o n f o r life i n a democratic
society. Consequently, you believe that a prime purpose of education is to socialize
diverse groups into a cohesive democratic c o m m u n i t y , and that the role of school is
to integrate children into a democratic society, where cooperation and community
are desired ends. With that understanding, you lead schools w i t h the belief thatt h e y
can be agents of social reform. In y o u r m i n d , the p r o b l e m w i t h education is that
it relies too heavily on lockstep, rote m e m o r i z a t i o n rather t h a n on ani n d i v i d u a l -
ized, problem-solving approach to learning. W i t h the push f o r easily measured ac-
countability, widespread school programs grounded i n this p h i l o s o p h y havef a l l e n
out of political favor on the state and national stage. A key exception is the Harlem
Children Zone led b y Geoffrey Canada. This p r o g r a m takes a holistic approach to
Chapte1
r © L a y i n g the G r o u n d w o r k 17
child development and learning.O t h e r policy examples include the use of service
jearning projects. For example, a Minnesota law signed in May 2009 established re-
uirements that schools m u s t m e e t to receive revenue f o r students e n r o l l e d i n a p u b -
lic school i n a project-based p r o g r a m . The b i l l defines a project-based i n s t r u c t i o n a l
program a s p r i m a r i l y s t u d e n t - l e d c o u r s e w o r k f o r c r e d i t that m a y be c o m p l e t e d on
site, in the c o m m u n i t y , o r o n l i n e a n d that is available to all o r o n l y some s t u d e n t s
and grades i n a school.
pHENOMENOLOGY AND EXISTENTIALISM. D o y o u believe that knowledge is i n d i v i d u -

ally centered?I f y o u r answer is yes, y o u m i g h t be a phenomenologist or an existentialist.
If your focus is on i n d i v i d u a l consciousness, perception, and meaning as they arise i n a
articular individual?s experience, then y o u are more closely associated w i t h p h e n o m -
enologists. I f y o u are more concerned w i t h the impact of knowledge on the lives of i n d i -
viduals, then you are oriented t o w a r d existentialism. Y o u r leadership is grounded i n the
view that the purpose o f education is to stress i n d i v i d u a l i t y by discussing the nonrational
as well as the rational w o r l d . Y o u believe that education problems arise i n schools w h e n
teachers do not pose questions, generate activities, and w o r k together w i t h students. Y o u

support a curriculum that is based on the humanities. Y o u w o r r y that, w i t h federal edu-
cation policy r e q u i r i n g testing i n m a t h and science, there is less emphasis on courses that
are not tested. T i g h t e n i n g budgets have led m a n y school leaders to cut music and art
from the regular curriculum. Y o u r views regarding the importance of the i n d i v i d u a l i n
the construction of his or her o w n knowledge do n o t dominate the current national dis-
course on education policy. For example, i n Minnesota, policymakers enacted the Profile
of Learning i n 1998 as part of the state?s h i g h school graduation standards. I t included
state-suggested curriculum packages, a state-mandated methodology for the classroom,
and an emphasis on hands-on and group projects. Though it seemed quite prescriptive
in tone, it sought to promote a constructivist v i e w on learning. Opponents viewed this
policy as an attack on academic rigor, and Minnesota policymakers eventually repealed
the law in 2003.
CONFLICT THEORY. Do you think that the role of education is to give students in-
sight on how to demystify dominant ideology and to help them become agents
of radical educational and social change? If you answered yes, you might be a
conflict theorist o r radical progressive. If your definition of education problems is
grounded in your belief that class struggles are an important undercurrent in most
education problems, you may feel an affiliation to this group of scholars. Your
leadership promotes supporting professional development that encourages teach-
ers to be transformative intellectuals who can understand the innate bias of the cur-
ticulum and existing educational structure. This is typically marked byw o r k s h o p s
centered on conversations about race and class, and the role of racism in student
outcomes. With the rise of political groups on the right, recent challenges to the
curriculum have been that i t is not sufficiently open to religious (read ?Christian?)
values (e.g., Spring, 2005). Groups and individuals w i t h a variety of political views
have tried to use policy to transform the system and to change the educational sta-
tus quo. An example of recent policy intended to facilitate educators changing the
Chapter 1 ¢ Laying the Groundwork 17
child d e v e l o p m e n t a n d l e a r n i n g . O t h e rp o l i c y examples i n c l u d e t h e use of service

jearning projects. F o r e x a m p l e , a M i n n e s o t a l a w s i g n e d i n M a y 2009 established re-
uirements that schools must meet to receive revenue for students enrolled i n a pub-
lic school in aproject-based program. The b i l l defines a project-based instructional
program as p r i m a r i l y student-led coursework for credit that may be completed on
ite, in the community, or online and that is available to all or only some students
and grades i n a school.
PHENOMENOLOGY AND EXISTENTIALISM. D o y o u believe that k n o w l e d g e is i n d i v i d u -

ally centered?I f y o u r answer is yes, y o u m i g h t be a phenomenologist o r an existentialist.
If your focus is o n i n d i v i d u a l consciousness, perception, and meaning as they arise i n a
particular individual?s experience, then y o u are more closely associated w i t h p h e n o m -
enologists. If you a r e m o r e concerned w i t h the impact o f knowledge on the lives o f i n d i -
viduals, then y o u are oriented t o w a r d existentialism. Your leadership is grounded i n the
view that the purpose of education is to stress i n d i v i d u a l i t y b y discussing the nonrational
as well as the r a t i o n a l w o r l d . Y o u believe that education problems arise i n schools w h e n
teachers do n o t pose questions, generate activities, and w o r k together w i t h students. Y o u
support a c u r r i c u l u m that is based on the humanities. Y o u w o r r y that, w i t h federal edu-
cation policy r e q u i r i n g testing i n m a t h and science, there is less emphasis on courses that
are not tested, T i g h t e n i n g budgets have led m a n y school leaders to cut music a n d art
from the regular c u r r i c u l u m . Y o u r views regarding the importance of the i n d i v i d u a l i n
the construction o f h i s o r her o w n k n o w l e d g e do n o t dominate the current national dis-
course on education policy. For example, i n Minnesota, policymakers enacted the Profile
of Learning i n 1998 as p a r t o f the state?s h i g h school graduation standards. I t i n c l u d e d
state-suggested c u r r i c u l u m packages, a state-mandated methodology f o r the classroom,
and an emphasis on hands-on a n d g r o u p projects. T h o u g h it seemed quite prescriptive
in tone, it sought to p r o m o t e a constructivist v i e w on learning. Opponents v i e w e d this
policy as an attack o n academic rigor, and Minnesota policymakers eventually repealed
the law i n 2003.
CONFLICT THEORY. D o y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e r o l e o f e d u c a t i o n is to g i v e s t u d e n t s i n -
sight on h o w t o d e m y s t i f y d o m i n a n t i d e o l o g y a n d to h e l p t h e m b e c o m e a g e n t s
of r a d i c a l e d u c a t i o n a l a n d social change? I f y o u a n s w e r e d yes, y o u m i g h t b e a
conflict t h e o r i s t o r r a d i c a l p r o g r e s s i v e . I f y o u r d e f i n i t i o n of e d u c a t i o n p r o b l e m s is
g t o u n d e d i n y o u r b e l i e f t h a t class struggles are an i m p o r t a n t u n d e r c u r r e n t i n m o s t
education p r o b l e m s , y o u m a y feel an a f f i l i a t i o n to t h i s g r o u p o f scholars. Y o u r
leadership p r o m o t e s s u p p o r t i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t encourages teach-
ers to be t r a n s f o r m a t i v e i n t e l l e c t u a l s w h o can u n d e r s t a n d t h e i n n a t e bias o f t h e c u r -
t i c u l u m a n d e x i s t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e . T h i s is t y p i c a l l y m a r k e d b y w o r k s h o p s
centered o n c o n v e r s a t i o n s a b o u t race a n d class, a n d t h e r o l e of r a c i s m i n s t u d e n t
outcomes. W i t h t h e rise o f p o l i t i c a l g r o u p s on the r i g h t , recent c h a l l e n g e s t o t h e
c u r r i c u l u m h a v e b e e n that i t is n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y open to r e l i g i o u s (read ? C h r i s t i a n ? )
values (e.g., S p r i n g , 2005). G r o u p s a n d i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h a v a r i e t y o f p o l i t i c a l v i e w s
have t r i e d to use p o l i c y t o t r a n s f o r m the system a n d to c h a n g e the e d u c a t i o n a l sta-
tus quo. A n e x a m p l e o f recent p o l i c y i n t e n d e d to f a c i l i t a t e e d u c a t o r s c h a n g i n g t h e
Below are six columns describing philosophical characteristics. Choose the values that best describe your beliefs. Working across each row, rate
the degree to which you identify with each o f the six statements by giving it a score from 0 to 10 (0 meaning you do not identify at all with this
statement, and 10 meaning you identify completely with this statement). The scores across the r o w must add up to 10 (for example, 10, 0, 0, 0,
0, 0; or 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 5; or 2, 2, 1, 1, 2,2). In other words, the numbers across the row can be any combination o f six numbers that add up to 10.
|
think that truth I t h i n k t h a t t r u t h can t h i n k t h a t truth is I
think that truth i t h i n k t h a t truth is {
t h i n k t h a t t r u t h is
?_?|
is universal a n d be found in the logic dynamic and is better is in t h e eye o f the d o m i n a t e d by t h e w h a t o n e makes o f it.
unchanging. of the world. u n d e r s t o o d i f i t is beholder. elite.
tied t o your everyday
experiences.
: a ERE BS
Education is about Education is a b o u t Education is more Education is a b o u t Education is a b o u t Education is a b o u t
abstract ideas, not discovering w h a t is a b o u t t h e learning focusing o n individual m a k i n g students creating critical
about fixing the real f r o m t h e laws o f process, n o t t h e consciousness and a w a r e o f oppressive thinkers.
community. nature. learning o u t c o m e . meaning. forces.
Fr ons} E a
Schools should set Schools should Schools should rely on Schools should focus Schools should focus Schools should focus
high standards for its enhance the reasoning inductive approaches __ on individuality. on social change. on connecting theory
students. skills of students. to enhance learning. and practice.
wore :
oct nem a ot
Students would be Students would be Students would be Students would be Students would be Students would be
better educated if better educated if they better educated if better educated if they better educated if better educated if
they were taught core = were grounded in schools connected made meaning of the _ the inherent biases schools focused more
knowledge. scientific investigation. knowledge to their nonrational as well as in education systems ?_ on the creation of a
reality. the rational world. were removed o r democratic education.
challenged.
ge 3 o g Knea
4
Knowledge is found Knowledge should Knowledge is best Knowledge occurs Knowledge should Knowledge should be
in the ideals that we promote a better developed by students only when students be about the creation about building a more
set, not in the world of | understanding of the doing. are allowed to of transformative democratic society.
matter. world. construct their own intellectuals.
knowledge of the
world.
Schools should p r o m o t e Schools should Schools should tie Schools should Schools s h o u l d Schools s h o u l d
higher-order thinking. P r o m o t e practical a n d t o g e t h e r research, promote the e n h a n c e t h e ability o f | p r o m o t e policies t h a t
applied courses. pedagogy, and humanities. s t u d e n t s t o b e critical make them more
individual experiences. consumers o f existing w e l c o m i n g f o r all
s c h o o l structures. families.
g O
Schools should be in the Schools should be a Schools should actively Schools should Schools should be Schools should be
business o f educating _? place f o r science and ?_ build a working promote pedagogy in the business o f in the business o f
children, not reforming learning, not building relationship with the ? where teachers pose transforming society. supporting democracy.
the ills of society. self-esteem. broader community. questions, generate
activities, and w o r k
together with
students.
E S ro R E a g y o e
Total column 1 Total column 2 Total column 3 Total column 4 Total column 5 Total column 6
,
e p B a e ty ny
A f t e r y o u h a v e r a t e d e a c h o f t h e six i t e m s across a l l s e v e n r o w s , t o t a l the n u m b e r s f o r each c o l u m n .
Interpretation:
I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 1, then y o u r values orientation is idealism.

I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 2, then y o u r values orientation is realism.
I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 3, then y o u r values orientation is pragmatism.
I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 4, then y o u r values orientation is p h e n o m e n o l o g y / e x i s t e n t i a l i s m .
I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 5, then y o u r values orientation is i n c o n f l i c t theory.
I f y o u r highest c o l u m n total is i n c o l u m n 6, then y o u r values orientation is i n critical theory.
20 Chapter 1 * L a y i n g the G r o u n d w o r k
nature of relationships w i t h i n the existing school structure is North p

HB 1566, adopted i n A u g u s t 2009. This act requires that the commissig akota Law
education in that state study the interplay between the stateuniversity «, of higher
tribally controlled c o m m u n i t y colleges. Specifically, it requires the a ?ystem an
to address ways in which the N o r t h Dakota university system as a whole sioner
i n d i v i d u a l campuses can better interact w i t h tribally controlled comm, wand the
leges through improved communication, collaboration, and relationshj r a col.
activities. In addition, the commissioner is called on to focus on ways in a a n
ally controlled c o m m u n i t y colleges can encourage American Indians to py ch t r i .
tions i n higher education. The policy hopes to b r i n g economic benefit toAmen .
Indian families and communities and to develop ways in which the univers; v e n
tem and the i n d i v i d u a l campuses can w o r k w i t h tribally controlledc o m m u n y
colleges.
POSTMODERNISM AND CRITICAL THEORY. D o y o u t h i n k t h a t schools should em ha

size r e a s o n a n d stress p r i n c i p l e s of e q u a l i t y , liberty, a n d justice? A yes answer means
t h a t y o u m i g h t be a p o s t m o d e r n i s t o r critical theorist. Y o u r leadership is grounded
i n t h e b e l i e f t h a t the role o f e d u c a t i o n is to p r o m o t e l o c a l i z e d and particular theories
r a t h e r t h a n to espouse t h e values o f a u n i v e r s a l t r u t h . Y o u t h i n k that the solution
to t h e p r o b l e m s o f society rest i n the c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e o r y and practice. This
c o n n e c t i o n can act as a c o r r e c t i v e to the s e p a r a t i o n o f ideas a n d practical applica-
tions i n m u c h m o d e r n i s t d e l i b e r a t i o n s . Y o u l i k e l y t h i n k t h a t the key education pol-
i c y p r o b l e m is the absence o f the d e v e l o p m e n t o f d e m o c r a t i c education. You argue
t h a t s c h o o l s are a s t r o n g t r a n s m i t t e r o f c u l t u r e , a n d teachers are either agents of
the status q u o o r agents o f change. B y a n d large, i n the U n i t e d States, the political
c u l t u r e o f the local c o m m u n i t i e s dictates w h i c h f o r m an educator?s transmission of
c u l t u r e is a l l o w e d to take (e.g., F o w l e r , 2009; S p r i n g , 2005). P o l i t i c a l culture refers
to the b r o a d set o f actions that are considered acceptable b y a community. Leaders who
are o r i e n t e d t o w a r d this p h i l o s o p h y o f t e n r e q u i r e policies t h a t make schools more
w e l c o m i n g f o r f a m i l i e s n o t c u r r e n t l y w e l l served b y the system. For example, part of
K e n t u c k y l a w 704 K A R 3:390, w h i c h w a s a d o p t e d i n F e b r u a r y 2009, requires districts
to solicit i n p u t f r o m p a r e n t s a n d t h e c o m m u n i t y a n d to i d e n t i f y potential barriers to
p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The l a w also r e q u i r e s t h a t the b a r r i e r s i d e n t i f i e d are addressed through
e n g a g e m e n t w i t h c o m m u n i t y p a r t n e r s o r o f f - c a m p u s locations o f after-school, week-
end, o r e v e n i n g services.
It is not always easy to predict which conditions w i l l be defined as policy issues
or w h i c h policies w i l l be enacted based on conventional wisdom regarding political
ideology or philosophy. For example, many liberal and conservative groupsare equally
vocal i n their opposition to w h a t they perceive as an unwelcoming school environ-
ment and an unacceptable status quo, Although their assumptions and goals maydif-
fer, groups from different philosophical camps may find themselves supporting oF OP?
posing the same policy. For example, there was multifaceted support for the parental
choice program i n Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and there is pluralistic opposition toNCLB.
Liberals often oppose this federal reform because they fear it is an opening salvo to
promote choice, introduce vouchers, and ultimately to end public schools andt h e y
commitment to the common good. Conservatives often oppose this le islation becaus
of the increased role of the federal government in state and local education matters
21
Chapter1 * Laying the Groundwork
till, the choice of w h a tc o n d i t i o n s w i l l spark discontent and the identification of a solv-

sblenegative condition is g r o u n d e d i n the balance and priorities of values that decision
s hold.
mane ble 1.3 categorizest h e key philosophies identified i n this chapter and offers
adescriptiono f the c o n c o m i t a n t assumptions o f reality, purpose o f education, a n d
the role of schooling. The first c o l u m n h i g h l i g h t s i m p o r t a n t philosophical schools o f
chought, from idealism to postmodernism. For pedagogical purposes, w e have cate-
orized the ?pure forms of these beliefs in i n d i v i d u a l cells, b u t as noted p r e v i o u s l y ,
education leaders m a y f i n d themselves d r a w n to m u l t i p l e philosophical camps. The
table also contains examples of problems that are generated f r o m these assumptions
and possible solutions. I n t h e last column are real-life examples of specific policies that
reflect aspects of the identified philosophies.
Policy V a l u e s i n A c t i o n
This section of the chapter p r o v i d e s an example o f h o w one education leader a r t i c u -

lates her intrinsic values a n d h o w t h e y i n f o r m her analysis o f education policy. I n a
1990 article, Yale U n i v e r s i t y president A m y G u t m a n n h i g h l i g h t e d t w o p o l i c y values
in particular that are at the h e a r t o f creating p o l i c y guidelines i n education: i n d i v i d -
ual freedom and civic v i r t u e . I n d i v i d u a l f r e e d o m refers to the absence of barriers
to individual action and thought. C i v i c v i r t u e refers to the existence o f i n d i v i d u a l
responsibility to the b r o a d e r c o m m u n i t y . She posits that the i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n
for educators is ?not w h e t h e r to m a x i m i z e freedom or to inculcate v i r t u e , b u t h o w
to combine freedom w i t h virtue? ( G u t m a n n , 1990, p. 11). G u t m a n n contends that
the very essence o f the e d u c a t i o n process requires the p r i v i l e g i n g o f values and a
conception of a good society. She asserts, ?The content of p u b l i c school cannot be
neutral among c o m p e t i n g conceptions o f the good life, and i f i t could, w e w o u l d n o t
and should n o t care to s u p p o r t it? (p. 16). The practical application o f this philoso-
phy requires education policies to be b o u n d e d by the principles of nonrepression
and nondiscrimination. That is, G u t m a n n argues t h a t e d u c a t i o n s h o u l d enhance
the freedom of r a t i o n a l i n q u i r y (nonrepression) and the i n c l u s i o n of all children i n
educational contexts ( n o n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n ) unless there is a legitimate rationale to
do otherwise.
With these g u i d e l i n e s , G u t m a n n contends that a major p r o b l e m w i t h schools
is the lack of d e m o c r a t i c i n s t i t u t i o n s , a n d she argues f o r a r e o r i e n t a t i o n f r o m con-
ventional goals. H e r o r d e r i n g o f v a l u e s calls h e r to reject t r a c k i n g , sexist educa-
tion, racial segregation, a n d n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d vocational education as a means o f
solving the p r o b l e m o f schools. She concludes t h a t ?[d]Jemocratic e d u c a t i o n em-
powers citizens to m a k e t h e i r o w n d e c i s i o n s on h o w to c o m b i n e f r e e d o m w i t h
virtue [thereby a u t h o r i z i n g ] p e o p l e to d i r e c t their i n d i v i d u a l and collective desti-
nies? (p. 19).
As education leaders, y o u w i l l l i k e l y develop y o u r o w n set of rules regarding

the appropriate ordering o f values f o r the identification of problems and the discov-
ery of solutions. That reflective process w i l l underlie m u c h of y o u r w o r k i np o l i c y
analysis, As education leaders, however, you are n o t o n l y called on to be t h o u g h t f u l ,
b u t also to act. This text provides a systematic w a y for you to be reflective, define a
Policy issue, and offer a p p r o p r i a t e reasoned arguments f o r its resolution.
B a i. _ _Educational Philosophies i n Schools
_
Purpose o f Role o f Educational
Philosophy Education Schooling Problem Possible Solutions
Idealism Uncover truth through To provide There is too little Increase reliance on core curriculum through the use of
ideas for the sake of avenue reliance on a cultural literacy and curriculum performance standards.
understanding ideas and t h r o u g h which ? core curriculum. In Kentucky, for example, each high school is mandated
the goal of transforming _ individuals to ?offer a core curriculum of advanced placement,
lives. can m o v e International Baccalaureate, dual enrollment, o r dual credit
toward the courses, using e i t h e r o r b o t h o n - s i t e instruction o r electronic
commen good instruction t h r o u g h t h e Kentucky Virtual High School o r
but through o t h e r o n - l i n e alternatives.?
d i f f e r e n t means,
w h e r e ability
plays a role in
t h e curriculum
t o w h i c h o n e is
exposed.
ee i
Realism Help individuals To enhance There is too Increase requirements for science classes in the curriculum.
understand and apply the ability o f little emphasis ? For example, Utah?s 2006 law R277-700 outlines core
scientific principles t o children to on the sciences ? curriculum requirements for K-12, and increases the state
make the world a better reason through __ in the regular minimum required units of credit for high school graduation
place. their study of curriculum. in language arts from 3 to 4, and in mathematics and
the material science, from 2 to 3. It is effective for students graduating in
world and thus the 2010-2011 school year. See http//www.rules.utah.gov/
allow t h e m publicat/code/r277/r277-700.htm
to choose
appropriate life
paths.
Pragmatism To balance the broader To encourage Students are Increase the use of service learning projects. For example,
needs o f society w i t h students t o find n o t sufficiently Minnesota law H.F. No. 2, signed in May 2009, defines a project-
t h e m o r e personal needs processes t h a t = e n g a g e d in t h e i r based instructional p r o g r a m as primarily student-led coursework
o f individuals so t h a t w o r k t o achieve _ learning. f o r credit that may be completed o n site, in t h e community, or
c h i l d r e n can learn t o desired ends. online and is available to all o r only some students a n d grades in
c o o p e r a t e a n d succeed in a school. It also establishes requirements that schools must m e e t
a d e m o c r a t i c society. to receive revenue f o r students enrolled in a public school a n d
in a p r o j e c t - b a s e d p r o g r a m . See h t t p s / A w w w . r e v i s o r . l e g . s t a t e .
m n . u s / p hbp ? bi i l i = n H O/ 0 0b2 . 5l . h tdm i &b s e is s ilo n l= l s.8 6
Jo
ped
Me]
GHu
?6007
?9951
IsnGny
F}0eq
YUON
paydope
ayy
auy
pue
Ajjequipaljo?u0>
wayshs
ayeys
Aejdaqul
usanyjaq
Aysuaaiun
ay} Ul
O}
SY}
Me] sy}
YLIYM
YON
seuinbad
?safayjo>
?Aljenyoads
AyunuWwo> e
pue
se
Ue)
SAeM ajoym
ayy
B}OFXE
Ssauppe
wayss
JBUOISSILLUOD Ajsuaniun
jenpiAipul
sasnduwe>
Uy sey
aly Ul
Bulpying-diysuoneja
JBUOISSILULUOD
0}
?saAnoe
?UOHIppe Snd0}
UO A}jeqUA
Y>IYM 0}
u l |IM
ued
Ul pue
SIU salu}
sueipuj
suoljdo
ueduaUy
aBesnosua
0}
Burbuug
ansind?UOReoNpea
sabajjoo Wjauag
YyNSaJ
JayBIy
StwOUOda
osje
}] UeIpU)
sapiaord
?SamuNwWLWOD
URDaWY
osje
aq
yeuy
suaueq
sasinbas
ayzy6noy}
Paynuap!
0} edu
404
Jo
payosjUO> passaippe
Buysixe SAEM
AYUNWWOD
?Pe
aol
jo
ay}
Ul
aseaIdU}
UONISS
puke
?SjOOUIS
?disnw
eWeIp
0}
ul jsea]
Hurinbas
ydope
peog
S-9
sajns
SAPD
aye3s
sjuapnys
aq
YUM joous ?ajduuexe
?aunjonuys
syawNsUOD
0} JU} Jo me]
Wau)
FEY]
sLO}eINpe
UONEWWOJU!
Je
0}
Se
33S
?MAY:
BUI BYa{dUUOD
?ASUNOD
BUO
SMO|je
apiAoig
Jo
sayy
ayy
Apnys
uoneonpa
yey)
sauinbau
JauOIsstwiWwod
YM
Ayequy
Janaq
sabajjod
PesayUI
Alunwwod
paljosjuod
40
sad] pue VAY
?Buioyny
pue
sabayjo>
Jayjo
?Buiojuaw
0}
apincid aie aus
UB
au) Aue 0}
0}?pu'sibay
UOneNpelb
WUAaPNis
?peseeiDu!
sejed
aL}
UeIpU]
ayy
puzg aAye|siba|
quawwajduui
?suoNepuaULUOda
0}
Indu!
[Hos
aut
pue
wos
YW ?6007
sjuaied
sasinbas
sDUAsIp JO Buruana
JO/pue
?seduas
?puayaam
SuOAeI0|
?}OCOYIS-sBYe
Aq ul
104Jo
AuePue
sajes Yodas uoje|sibaj
sBulpuy
ay} yey} OZ
Jauoissiwuu02
saunbas
aduelsisse
auNsua
Aiessazau
UOnUa}as
Buoje
yum mawy.diy
33s ?SUONepUaLULUODa/ /6002-19/A\quuasse/ao6
Me]
ped Aenuga
?og¢:¢
paydope
Ayonjuay
0}
pauinbas
ul
Jo
?€
aH
GZ?6007
pauGis
Me]
aud
Sexal
seunbai
auns
?Ajquiasse
Jou tom
panias
sarwey
AQuauNd
?aiduexa
?waysks 03 Ajnuapi
syawieq
jenuajod
Aunuiwos
Yuonedpied
|
§Pd
JEOOOOEH/APAAXEHIIGY
8/2OPOR/SN'x7
pue LWa}shs uw
areys'si69| y6nosUy
pancrduut ued yeun
?uonei0ge|[O>
ayy
ay)
Ayunusw0>
Ajjequa
440M
sasndwe>
payjo..u0s
axe
JO}
sjOOUDs
aio
Ul
SAE auinbay
sainyjod
?uoReruNWWWOD
Bulwio2}am
pue
JENPIAIpUI
YdIUM
ASIaATUN
Jo
YM siauped
Juawabebua
Aunuiwo3
sndwes-}4o
4pd'Q0E0SdarAxey-|11q
pure
purjo
sarod
WIMWoy
?UEsyoo>
(100z)
(6002)
uo
?fRUAOpes
uayLy
TION
ApeEUd
ewWasUOReonpy
UOISSTUWOD
sajdurexa
Apuapiuyns
jou 3}
0}
pasodxe
aue
saiyinbaul
ul
paonposdas
Burwo>jamun
aie
UsIpPIYyD ?sanluewny
oo)
Auew Jeanqonays
?sjoOYrs
ae
uayo JO}
sadejd
?abaytaud
sjooyss SolWwey
ynouyM
mMye
jay
/D
ojo
st
?uo
MMM Jo
Aq
st
a
arp
Sq
/:dryy oY)
Wed
pue
sayqjod
SuTaqey
ajoNsoyyne
paptaosd
?saqeqg
yeuy
Popeopimop
you
?woUMDdOp
JO
asuas
ayeu
sanjasuuay)
pue SANEUUIOJSULL}
JO
uoneunuexs
pue
A6oBbepad jeonj0d
?uorpe
©}
sjenpwupu
?PHOM
sjenoa||aqut
sy) ul
e JO}
0} e
oF
apiaoid Jeon anuaA
oO.
mole syayoea}
ae
OUM
OUM
pue abebua
Sjuapnys
au}
?POM
of
apiagid
apiaoid
JEon>
OF
UUM
apiaoud Puejssapun
UaJpIIUD
ay}
OFUO
sSpeau
sMd04
0]
s}00}
ayy
Ul
au} 3}
SassaUxeaM
pue
ABojoap!
jueuwop
JO}
e
OLaNuaA
apiacid
syaypea}
a20)dxa
0}
3} 0}
3q
Jey
Aew
wees
Ajuaayul
Aopipenuos
0}
pue
JAalye
saucayy
0}
ay)
aBueyd
snjeys SeaualayIp
uaamjaq
pue
Bulpueysuapun
yeuy
yBnoyy
abuey>
Jo
?SJENPIAIput
?uonerojdxa
-onb
Aq
paseq
Joujne
papiduno:>
-a2unog
pue
wsyenuaispc
ABojouswouseyd
Asay)
pue
j2onUD
IYyUOD
Aroay3 wislwapougsodg
24 = Chapter1 * Laying the Groundwork
a ,
Chapter Summary
T h i s c h a p t e r lays the g r o u n d w o r k f o r p o l i c y does n o t mean t h a t the process should
analysis. I t opens w i t h a rationale for leaders to g r o u n d e d i n data and l o g i c a l argumentce e
s t u d y the field. I t makes the p o i n t that the focus t h e s u b j e c t i v i t y of the p o l i c y a n a l y t i c a l but
+
o f this text is n o t to give y o u r i g h t answers b u t cess makes it all the m o r e important to Cf Pro.
assertions and to m a k e clear for r e a d o u t
to offer y o u a r i g h t p a t h f o r getting those an-
swers. I t presents a basic o v e r v i e w of the p o l i c y choices being made and w h y . Decision making
is g r o u n d e d i n the values that we bring andthe
analysis process a n d continues w i t h a system- philosophies to w h i c h we subscribe. °
atic w a y of c a t e g o r i z i n g the field. B y the e n d of
This chapter offers a systematic way ofd
this chapter, y o u s h o u l d be aware o f d i f f e r e n t termining h o w values and policy intersect,T hat
ways of categorizing the field and h o w y o u r intersection frames the philosophy of education
w o r k w i l l f i t i n the broader p o l i c y context. that y o u hold. A m y Gutmann?s prescriptive trea.
This text focuses on ex ante analysis, w i t h tise offers a guide for developing education poli
the presumption that, as an education leader, f o r the good of a democratic society. As aneduce
you w i l l have to propose strategies, not simply tion leader, you w i l l ultimately accept or reject her
respond to them. By relying on ex ante analysis, treatise, perhaps m o d i f y i n g her guidance to come
we can examine howa possible solution would up w i t h a p h i l o s o p h y o f y o u r own. From these
w o r k in theory and can anticipate and address reflections, y o u can better i n f o r m your thinking
potential challenges to successful resolution of of h o w problems are defined and solutions are
the policy issue. found i n the p o l i c y analysis process. You are now
I t is important to note from the outset that ready to j u m p into the heart of the text, which de
the policy analysis process is not objective. This tails the steps i n the p o l i c y analysis process.
Review Questions
1. W h y is policy analysis important for educa- 4, Review the section describing the key phi-
tion leaders? losophies of education. Which of the eight
2. Is leadership different f r o m management? values identified b y Fowler would dominate
H o w does policy analysis allow managers to each of the philosophies described?
lead? 5. H o w w o u l d you describe your philoso-
3. F o w l e r identifies eight fundamental values phy of education? What are your intrinsic
that she asserts individuals share: (1) individ- values?
ualism, (2) order, (3) equality, (4) liberty, (5) 6. H o w w o u l d y o u r philosophy of education
fraternity, (6) economic growth, (7) efficiency, influence y o u r response to the questions
and (8) quality. Do you think Fowler's list is raised in the chapter-opening education
accurate? Explain. vignette?
News Story for Analysis i
?Calgary school to deploy ?Go Grrrl? philosophy.? operate with a curriculum based on a philosophy '
National Post (Canada). December 4, 2002, Wednesday called ?Go Grrrl.? :
A l l but Ottawa Edition. SOURCE: National Post. About 100 Calgary parents are pushing for :
BYLINE: Heather Sokoloff. SECTION: News; Pg. A l . the school, where classes will use a program de- j
Alberta is poised to accept a proposal to open veloped by two Arizona researchers called the ?Go/
the country?s f i r s t all-girls public school that w o u l d Grrrl? curriculum.
C h a p t e1r © Laying the Groundwork 25
Central to i t is a ?Grrrls Bill o f Rights,? w h i c h

?Girls are faced with 2,000 media images a
emphasizes b r i n g i n g female professionals into the day and they are all told they have to look a cer-
classroom to talk aboutt h e i r jobs, e x a m i n i n g the tain way, wear certain clothes, be a certain weight.
media?s role i n constructing a girl?s image of herself, There has to be ways we can counter that.?
and teaching the importance o f female friendships, Parents say they warmed to the idea o f
Students w i l l be encouraged to direct much
single-sex education after noticing their pre-teen
of their own learning to build decision-making daughters were paying more attention to boys than
skills and learn to look after themselves. school work.
U l t i m a t e l y , the g i r l s s h o u l d g r a d u a t e u n - Ms. C a w t h o r n e is also concerned a b o u t re-
derstanding the importance o f economic indepen- search t h a t indicates teachers call o n b o y s m o r e
dence, said Lynn Bosetti, an education professor at often than g i r l s i n class, take their questions more
the University of Calgary w h o w a n t s to send her seriously and devote class t i m e to d e a l i n g w i t h
10-year-old daughter to the school. their discipline problems.
?That doesn?t mean that a girl who wants She is also well aware of research from the
to be a homemaker can?t come to this school. She 1980s and 1990s that shows girls perform better
would be encouraged to be a great homemaker, academically in single-gender institutions. ?This.
and make the best decisions to get her there.? will be an environment that is really nurturing for
Students w i l l be t a u g h t to question the im- young girls, that tells them all possibilities are open
ages and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of w o m e n . In art class, to them.?
students m i g h t be asked to f i n d o u t w h y Degas The g r o u p is also taking the u n u s u a l step o f
chose to depict so m a n y ballerinas. ?We w a n t them proposing that parents and students have the r i g h t
to understand the baggage and the benefits that to evaluate their teachers a n d principal, as w e l l as
come w i t h being a w o m a n , ? Dr. Bosetti said, e x p e r i m e n t w i t h the use o f m e r i t pay t o r e w a r d
The curriculum is crafted to give students an outstanding teaching.
understanding of women?s role in history, art and lit- That part o f their p l a n has p u t the g r o u p at
erature as preparation for careers in such male-dom- odds w i t h the Calgary Board o f Education. T h e
inated fields as business, science and engineering. p u b l i c school b o a r d is enthusiastic a b o u t creat-
But the school founders are split over i n g an all-girls school b u t is b o u n d by the teachers
whether to term the school philosophy ?feminist.? union?s collective agreement, w h i c h f o r b i d s p a r - ,
?What we are wanting is for girls to have all ents f r o m p l a y i n ga role i n teacher evaluation. ?
the opportunities they can possibly have. If that is School board officials are hoping the parents-
considered feminist by some people, well, then I. will forgo the teacher evaluation scheme and open.
guess you can call it feminist,? said Liz LoVecchio, up as an alternative public school next September.
the parents? s p o k e s w o m a n and a g r a d u a t e o f a n ?Teachers being evaluated by non-profes- |
all-girls school. sionals is inappropriate,? said Kally Krylly, co-

?But it?s n o t a w o r d I am comfortable using ordinator of program renewal at the public school
because it sets o u t certain connotations.? board. ?The program itself is something that we
The term does n o t m a t t e r m u c h to Jane can accept. Particular aspects, such as merit pay,
Cawthorne, a girls-school graduate and the m o t h e r we cannot do that.?
ofa 10-year-old girl. Ms. C a w t h o r n e said feminists The parents w i l l have to s u b m i t their p r o -
might object to the proposal, saying the separation posal directly to Lyle Oberg, Alberta?s M i n i s t e r o f :
of boys and girls leaves young w o m e n ill-equipped Education, i f the school board officially rejects the ,
to deal with men i n the real world. plan, w h i c h i t is expected to do. The parents w i l l |
?That's not my concern right now. My con- f o r m a l l y s u b m i t their proposal at a school b o a r d ?
o a t is getting her through these crucial years,? she meeting on Dec. 17.
said,
Dr. Oberg can permit the parents to create a
Giving girls their own school is the best charter school, meaning the school w o u l d receive
way to avoid the self-esteem crash that often oc- public funding but be r u n independently b y parents. ?
curs when girls begin their adolescent years, Ms. ?I think they will get it, one way or another,? |
Cawthorne said, he said during an interview last night.
26 C h a p t e1r ¢ Laying the Groundwork
He added he is ?intrigued? by the teacher ! c C l u n g G i r l s J u n i o rH i g h P r ,

The Nellie M mo
evaluation proposal, although he will need assur- Edmonton is the only one in Canada, Fo, e t in,
t
ances from the parents that teachers interested in 1995 with 70 students, enrollment mushron 4i n
working at the school have agreed to the conditions. more than 500 girls this year, Med ty
?T think it?s very interesting and actually quite More than 100 Calgary Parents haye
exciting. What they are doing is tryingt o assure that the proposal to create a new facility fo, $lgneq :
their children receive the best teaching, and no one Grades 4 through 7. Subsequent gradesw Biri i n !
can argue with a parent's desire to do that.? added later if the plan is accepted, Ud be:
A l t h o u g h c o m m o n i n the Catholic andp r i -
vate sectors, single-sex public schools are a rarity.
Source: Material reprinted with the express permission of: ?National Post Inc.? Q
ae a a
Discussion Questions
1, What are the philosophies of education that are school? If yes, what is it? If no, why not? Explain
apparent in this article? How do they influence your response,
education policies that emerge? 5. Distinguish between the intrinsic and extrinsic
2. Would you want to lead a school like this? Explain. values of the various stakeholders described in
3. If you were leading this school, what policy direc- the article. How do you know which values are
tion would you set? described and who holds them?
4. Is there a role for state (provincial) or school
board leaders in p r o v i d i n g oversight for this
Selected Websites
Philosophy o f Education Society of Great Britain, promotes the development of policy based on avail-
Available at able research and strategies. The website contains
https://www.philosophy-of-education.org/use- comprehensive packages of information on a grow-
ful_websites.asp. ing number of early learning, K-12, and ?postsecond-
tes : ary issues in the United States, ranging from broad
This is the homepage for the Philosophy of .
a :
Education Society of Great Britain. Its useful links overviews to in-depth policyanalyses.
offer a great search engine for looking up a variety o f U.S. Department of Education.
. i No Child Left
philosophical terms in its field guide to the nomen- Behind Act of 2001. Available at
clature of P philosophy.
phy. http://www.ed
ttp gov/policylelsecileglesea02lindex.
policy
Education Commission o f the States. Available at html. detail
. This is the official government website detailing
httpillwurw.ecs.org. .
a the goal andobjectives of the federal N o Child Left
This is the homepage of The Education Commission Behind A c t of 2001. I t contains the full 670 pages of
of the States (ECS). This organization was created the act. It is also delineated by sections and titles so
in 1965 to improve p u b l i c education byf a c i l i t a t i n g that particular sections may be reviewed. This site is
the exchange of information, ideas, and experiences useful because as education leaders it is important
among state policymakers and education leaders. I t to separate fact from fiction. This site provides the
is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organizationi n v o l v i n g contents of the law and i s not tempered byanyone's
key leaders from all levels of the education system, views of it.
and builds partnerships, shares information, and
Chapter1 * Laying the Groundwork 27
selected References
Frase, L. E., & Streshly, W . (2000). Top 10 m y t h s w o u l d be useful to reflect o n the differences (if any)
in education: Fantasies A m e r i c a n s love to believe. between y o u r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s and his based o n
Lanham, M D : Scarecrow Press (Technomic Books). y o u r particular philosophy o f education.
The authors discuss various beliefs c u r r e n t l y held b y Lépez, G. R., Scribner, J. D., & M a h i t i v a n i c h c h a , K .
many education leaders, i n c l u d i n g the belief that ed- (2001, Summer). R e d e f i n i n g parental i n v o l v e m e n t :
ucation can save society and that national testing w i l l Lessons f r o m h i g h - p e r f o r m i n g m i g r a n t - i m p a c t e d
poost achievement. This b o o k has a strong p o i n t o f schools. American E d u c a t i o n a l Research Journal,
view, w i t h w h i c h you m a y agree o r disagree. Its use- 38(2), 253-288.
fulness is i n its i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f m a j o r assumptions
The school of pragmatism has t w o main categories:
and values i n the field. I t also gives readers a sense o f
(1) instrumentalism a n d (2) e x p e r i m e n t a l i s m . Those
the disagreement that exists r e g a r d i n g the appropri-
w h o s u p p o r t instrumentalism s t r o n g l y f a v o r h a v i n g
ate road to education reform.
a w o r k i n g relationship between school a n d society.
Gutmann, A. (1990). D e m o c r a t i c education i n d i f f i - This article b y Lopez, Scribner, a n d M a h i t i v a n i c h c h a
cult times. Teachers College Record, 92(1), 7-20. reflects an i n s t r u m e n t a l i s t o r i e n t a t i o n . I t d e m o n -
strates h o w h a v i n g parents p l a y a m o i e active r o l e
Gutmann discusses the tension between civic v i r t u e
i n the formal education of their c h i l d r e n can lead to
and individual f r e e d o m a n d argues t h a t this ten-
positive outcomes for all those i n v o l v e d i n the learn-
sion is a f u n d a m e n t a l challenge for education. She
i n g process: parents, children, and educators.
proposes creating a ?state o f democratic education,?
which leaves m a x i m u m r o o m for citizens to shape N o l l , J. W. (2009). Taking sides: Clashing vi ew s
their society in an image w i t h w h i c h they can i d e n t i f y on educational issues (15th ed.). D u b u q u e , I A :
their moral choices. This is a good treatise to review McGraw-Hill.
in terms of h o w you can make the philosophical ar- Noll presents current controversial issues i n a debate-
guments needed to justify the p o l i c y actions that you style format. He frames each issue w i t h an issue s u m -
recommend. mary, an issue i n t r o d u c t i o n , and a postscript. T h i s
Hirsch, E. D . (2010). F i r s t , d o n o h a r m [ Q u a l i t y book is h e l p f u l for education leaders because o f the
Counts 2010]. E d u c a t i o n W e e k , 29(17), 29, 31. o v e r v i e w it provides on the l e a d i n g a r g u m e n t s f o r
and against key contemporary policies.
The author argues that language standards need to
focus on academic content i n literature, history, sci- Sadovnik, A. R., Cookson, P. W., & Semel, S. F. (2001).
ence, and the arts being taught comprehensibly and
Exploring education: A n introduction to the f o u n d a -
tions o f education (2nd ed.). Boston: A l l y n & Bacon.
collectively. Hirsch advocates a c o m m o n c u r r i c u l u m
to which leaders o f local school districts w o u l d have The authors provide a sound introduction to the phi-
to adhere. This article is useful to education leaders losophy of education that teachers and other educa-
because it offers concrete recommendations based on tors would find helpful in reflecting on their profes-
the author?s definition o f the p r o b l e m o f education. I t sion and its reform.
Getting Started
at the Beginning
Thinking o f Policy Analysis as Problem Analysis
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
A f t e r reading this chapter, you w i l l be able to:
® Define policy analysis
= Describe the fundamental method underlying p o l i c y analysis
= Identify the six to eight key phases of policy m a k i n g

® Distinguish between policy making and policy analysis
= Differentiate between policy evaluation and policy analysis
= List the steps necessary for a rational approach to developing policy
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
Dr. Know enters the district administration office. He still gets a kick out of entering the
building in his new role as the new superintendent o f Nikville, a n d he wants to lead by
example by having a collaborative process for making decisions in the district. He has
called together the two executive directors o f his district as well as the principals of all 11
secondary schools. He asks them to brainstorm about the challenges facing secondary
education in the district and ways of tackling those challenges. He goes around the room
asking each participant to tell him what is the biggest problem facing the district. One by
one, the participants speak up: ?Unfunded mandates.? ?No Child Left Behind.? ?Buaget
cuts.? ?State standards,? ?Union contracts.?
How would you respond to each o f these ideas? How can you ensure that Dr. Know 8
getting at the heart o f policy analysis?
28
Chapter 2 * Getting Started at the Beginning 29
WHERE p o Y O U S T A R T ?
t h e Role o f L e a d e r s
Leaders must see order i n chaos, envision excellence i n mediocrity, and pursue a better
world. To dot h a t , they m u s t be able to i d e n t i f y what is w r o n g and have an idea about
what ?good? looks like. For example, the Reverend M a r t i n Luther K i n g , Jr. p o i n t e d o u t
that the distribution of c i v i l tights was inequitable i n the U n i t e d States and conceived of
atime when justice w o u l d prevail. Stephen Denning, business leader and f o r m e r W o r l d
Bank executive, thought that there was insufficient access to the knowledge about solu-
tions to global poverty, and he envisioned a w o r l d where that knowledge was readily
accessible. Rudy Perpich, f o r m e r governor of Minnesota, was perturbed about the fact
that his children could n o t attend any public school they wanted and w a s instrumen-
tal in passing the first charter school l a w s in the United States. K r i s t i n Waters, f o r m e r
principal of Bruce R a n d o l p h School in Denver, Colorado, considered that n o t enough
students were being successful i n school. By the end of her tenure, reading proficiency
went up by 22 percentage points, and 97 percent of the students graduated.
What are the education conditions that you w o u l d like to change? W h a t is y o u r
image of the future, a n d where w o u l d y o u start i n p u r s u i n g it?
POLICY A N A L Y S I S A S P R O B L E M A N A L Y S I S
The P r o b l e m is t h e B e g i n n i n g o f A n a l y s i s
Policy analysis m a y be a m i s l e a d i n g term. The policy analysis process does n o t begin

with policies that have already been in place; it begins w i t h a recognition that a f u n d a -
mental condition needs to be changed. A n i m p o r t a n t part of that recognition is being
able to tell the difference among conditions, p o l i c y problems, and policy issues. The
importance of starting w i t h the problem cannot be overstated and is an i m p o r t a n t step
in making the w o r l d a better place. For example, D u n n (2004) notes that the failure of
many policies lies i n the misdiagnosis o f the problem rather than in mistakes made i n
finding the right solution. A v a r i e t y of p o l i c y researchers concur (Bardach, 2009; Patton
& Sawicki, 1993). M a n y researchers agree that starting w i t h a policy solution instead
of the problem definition often l i m i t s the alternatives that are considered and leads to
analysts displacing ends w i t h a nonrational focus on means.
What does this mean for you as an education leader? You will need to start your °
quest for change w i t h a s i m p l e identification of the condition that you w o u l d like to

change. To do that effectively, y o u need to distinguish among conditions, p o l i c y prob-
lems, and policy issues.
Differences A m o n g C o n d i t i o n s , Policy Problems, and Policy Issues

Conditions are basic descriptions o f the w o r l d that can be supported by empirical data.
For example, a basic description of a condition m a y be that a large p r o p o r t i o n of t h i r d -
§taders are not reading at grade level. This is a condition that policymakers hope to
address w i t h the adoption o f the reauthorized N o C h i l d Left Behind A c t of 2001. We
May note that not enough o f the p o p u l a t i o n has a postsecondary degree or that first-
generation college students have l o w e r persistence rates than their peers. These last t w o
?onditions are the focus of the efforts of members of the College Board?s Commission
30 Chapter 2 © Getting Started at the Beginning
on Access. Generally, these conditions can be found readily, and y o u r readers yw:
have to take your w o r d for it. Y o u can produce data that ared e s c r i p t i v ei n n a b Not
do n o t require readers to have the same belief systems that you do. © and
A l l conditions that you choose to highlight and w o u l d like to do somethin

are n o t policy problems, however. For conditions to be transformed to Policyp r ee ?bout
they must contain three basic characteristics. First they must be shown to be ne ems,
Second, they must be solvable using public resources. Third, they should be solved unr®
public resources. I f any of these elements are missing, the transformation of aconditie
to a policy problem is n o t complete, and you should revisit y o u r identification ofthe
policy problem. For example, the Wake County School Board i n N o r t h Carolina recent
took steps to reverse a longstanding policy to promote racial diversity in its schools
This suggests that education leaders in that c o m m u n i t y no longer considered a lack of
racial diversity in their schools to be a policy problem. Perhaps they no longerconsid.
ered the condition to be negative, solvable, or solvable using public resources, Theirace
tions prompted a response from U.S. secretary of education Arne Duncan, appointed b
President-elect Obama in 2008 and confirmed b y the U.S. Senate i n January 2009, He de.
cried the move by the Wake County School Board as an action against the core values of
the nation. H e wrote, ?In an increasingly diverse society like ours, racial isolation is nota
positive outcome f o r children of any color or background? (Duncan, 2011). This discus-
sion again highlights the importance of education leaders being able to persuade others
on the existence of a policy problem in the first place. I t also underscores the usefulness
of the policy analysis process i n the act of leadership.
In the same w a y that n o t all conditions rise to the level of policy problems, not
all policy problems are policy issues. Policy issues are a special subcategory ofpolicy
problems. O n l y policy problems on w h i c h there is disagreement over the most appro-
priate solution are p o l i c y issues. O n l y policy issues require the f u l l steps of the policy
analysis process described herein. I f there is already agreement on the most appropriate
w a y to resolve a policy problem, there is no need to use resources to try to find out what
the most appropriate resolution is because you already know. The next step would be
to i m p l e m e n t the agreed-on strategy. Let us go back to the condition of too little ethnic
diversity o r racial isolation among students in schools. If education leaders agreed that
this condition needs to be changed and the w a y to address it is through the busing of
students, the condition w o u l d be a policy problem, n o t a policy issue. One reason that
the condition of student diversity at all education levels remains an issue for education
leaders is that, w h i l e there is general agreement that w e need to avoid racial isolation,
we are n o t sure how. For example, the use of busing i n U.S, elementary and second-
ary schools was a common strategy that has lost political favor in recent years because
m a n y education leaders, c o m m u n i t y activists, and researchers did n o t find these pro-
grams to be effective at reducing racial isolation (e.g., Orfield, Frankenberg, & Lee,
2002/2003). I n higher education institutions, the use o f admission quotas have similarly
been challenged, and certain aspects of this strategy have been found unconstitutional
by the U.S. Supreme Court.
M a k i n g sure that y o u r p o l i c y analysis is clear about the d i s t i n c t i o n among
conditions, problems, and issues has the effect of C l a r k Kent?s transformation into
Superman. W h e n C l a r k Kent dons his costume and transforms himself, heroic a
tions f o l l o w a n d c o m m o n citizens are w i l l i n g to believe in change. Similarly, if edu-
cation leaders do n o t t r a n s f o r m conditions into p o l i c y problems, it is unlikely that
Chapter 2 ©
Getting Started at the Beginning 31
FIGURE 2.1 Relationship Among Conditions, Policy Problems, and Policy Issues
their c o m m u n i t i e s w i l l b e w i l l i n g t o d o t h i n g s d i f f e r e n t l y . O n l y w h e n t h e t r a n s f o r -
mation f r o m c o n d i t i o n t o p o l i c y p r o b l e m s takes p l a c e are d e c i s i o n m a k e r s a n d o t h e r
stakeholders w i l l i n g t o act. F i g u r e 2.1 i l l u s t r a t e s the n e s t e d n a t u r e a n d r e l a t i o n s h i p s
among c o n d i t i o n s , p o l i c y p r o b l e m s , a n d p o l i c y issues.
The Policy A n a l y s i s P r o c e s s
Once you have established that you havea p o l i c y issue, the policy analytical process
has begun. The definition of the policy process described b y Fowler (2009 p.13) is useful
here in describing w h a t policy analysis is: ?The policy process is the sequence of events
that occurs whena political system considers different approaches to public problems,
adopts one of them, tries it out, and evaluates it.? The difficulty is h o w to choosea m o n g
the various strategies that can be adopted to resolve a p o l i c y issue. Clearly, w e can
choose among options i n several ways. We could f l i p a coin, or w e c o u l d recite the
time-honored eeny, meeny, m i n y , moe b u t those strategies are not as persuasive o r as
systematic and do n o t p r o v i d e a transparent accounting of w h y w e chose one strategy
over another.
The policy analysis process is a good way of helping policymakers to choose
the most appropriate use of limited resources given particular constraints. Those con-
straints may mean that politics and ideology play a big part, but even that isimportant
to document explicitly so that the decision to choose one approach over another is clear.
It is important to emphasize that, while the policy analytical process is not necessarily
objective, it should betransparent.
THE COMPLEXITIES OF POLICY ANALYSIS.

As noted b y Fowler (2009) and others,
Policy issues are, by their very nature, controversial; they are also dynamic.
nat sparks disagreement in a particular community and i na particular time
* not fixed, Before the judges handed d o w n their decision in Brown v. Board of
stucation in 1954, many key decision makers in the United States did not iden-
y the differing education opportunities offered to blacks and whites as prob-
s c h e : Because many leading state policymakers did not consider the gap i n
o o l i n g O p p o r t u n i t i e s as p r o b l e m a t i c , t h e r e w a s n o p o l i c y i s s u e . T h i s d o e s
32 Chapter 2 ©
Getting Started at the Beginning
n o t mean t h a t actors cannot use the p o l i t i c a l process to ensure the relabeling
o f c o n d i t i o n s a n d r e v i s i o n o f contexts so t h a t c o n d i t i o n s that w e r e considered
the n o r m are no longer acceptable i n the p u b l i c m i l i e u . T h i s was the case after
the Brown decision: The c o n d i t i o n of l e g a l l y m a n d a t e d separate schooling for
blacks a n d w h i t e s w a s n o w c o n s i d e r e d a p o l i c y p r o b l e m , a n d p o l i c y m a k e r s
c o n t i n u e to disagree a b o u t the a p p r o p r i a t e w a y of r e s o l v i n g it. For example,
O r f i e l d , Frankenberg, a n d Lee (2002/ 2003) argue t h a t b u s i n g and other policies
often used b y state and d i s t r i c t p o l i c y m a k e r s to reduce desegregation have not
w o r k e d w e l l and t h a t segregation i n p u b l i c schools has increased rather than de-
creased over the last 50 years. W r a g a (2006) offers a m o r e o p t i m i s t i c assessment
of e x i s t i n g desegregation policies a n d suggests that t h e y are an effective w a y of
r e d u c i n g racial i s o l a t i o n a m o n g c h i l d r e n of color.
N o Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 is another example of a policy that arose
from key policymakers pushing for the redefinition of a condition as a problem. In the
past, w e generally assessed h o w schools are doing b y their overall student performance,
We considered schools that had high overall achievement (measured b y mean student
performance on standardized tests) as being effective. The adoption of N o Child Left
Behind in 2002 led to a national reevaluation of what goods schools look like and what
effective schools do. In the new definition, federal policymakers n o w explicitly defined
the gap between the performance of black and that of w h i t e students as problematic.
While there n o w seems to be general agreement that the achievement gap between
blacks and whites is a policy problem, deep disagreement remains among education
leaders on the best w a y of resolving it.
POLICY A N A L Y S I S VERSUS POLICY M A K I N G
The R o l e o f P o l i c y A n a l y s t s
Notice that the role of policy analysts is different from that of policymakers, even
though there may be some overlap. We usually think of p o l i c y analysts as individuals
interested i n the technical aspects of policy and as being removed f r o m political tur-
moil, short time horizons, and the give and take of policy making. We usually associate
policymakers w i t h politicians, w h o generally want to have an immediate impact on the
political system and its outcomes and who want to be in the center of the struggle to
have certain values reflected i n selected policy choices. Both policy analysts and policy-
makers are concerned about the collective, and their decisions affect the broader com-
munity. As an education leader, you w i l l also need to w o r r y about the broader society
and the short- and long-term implications of your decisions. Y o u w i l l need to analyze
problems and offer solutions that balance the needs of the political environment.
Education leaders w i l l have to draw on both their analytical and political skills,
b u t it is important to note that the process of policy analysis is different from that of
policy making. Policy analysis is a systematic search for the appropriate solution of
a policy issue that has been identified and defined. P o l i c y m a k i n g is essentially the
struggle to have y o u r values backed b y the authoritative role of government (Wirt &
Kirst, 1975). Successful policy analysis ends w i t h the appropriate solution for the policy
problem that was identified given the goals and constraints. Successfulp o l i c y m a k i n g
is f u l l y anchored in the political system. It ?is the dynamic and value laden process
through which a political system handles a public problem? (Fowler, 2009 pp. 3-4).
actionable problems are largely f o u n d i n the political realm, it is imperative

pecauise leaders havea basic understanding of the policy-making process.
that education
phases in P o l i c y M a k i n g
__gdon (1995)proposes that policy is accomplished in the United States when three
streams int h epolicy-making process?problem stream, politics stream, and
portant
eicy stream?merge. This description holds true for other democracies and may be
pe ied to other forms of governance, too. What education leaders should take away
from this discussion is the need t o monitor conditions that may rise to the level of a
olicy problem. W i t h the dynamic,a n d o f t e n chaotic, nature of the policy-making pro-
Pes, it is often easy to focus on existing policies, power relationships, and distribution
of resources, rather than on the nature of the condition that education leaders w o u l d
like to change.
pROBLEM STREAM. As w i t h the p o l i c y analytical process, the definition of problems i n

licy making is dynamic and iterative. However, there is longstanding concern among
policy scholars that researched and scholarly definitions of the problem seldom make
it into the policy-making arena. Heck (2004) counters that evidence o f the practical in-
fluence of scholarship m a y be l i m i t e d i n the short run, b u t in the l o n g run, c u m u l a t i v e
evidence generally influences h o w policymakers define the policy problem i n the field.
The problem stream essentially captures h o w problems are defined. K i n g d o n
(1995) observes that indicators, focusing events, and feedback bring problematic condi-
tions to the attention of policymakers. Indicators are the data that describe the m a g n i -
tude of the problem. Focusing events are occurrences that help to transform a condition
into a problem i n the m i n d of decision makers. Feedback provides information on h o w
the status of the condition has changed or remained the same. Education leaders need
tobe aware of these three components and be able to present information about them so
that decision makers and their constituencies find them useful.
Why should education leaders care? Education leaders m u s t try and influence the
problem stream because h o w the problem is defined influences the nature of the solu-
tions that w i l l prevail. For example, i n the early tenure of Steve Denning at the W o r l d
Bank, key members i n the organization defined the key problem facing the organiza-
tion as global p o v e r t y caused b y insufficient m o n e t a r y resources. W i t h the p r o b l e m
defined in that way, the key solution w o u l d be to increase monetary resources i n the
form of loans or grants. Steve Denning wanted to rediagnose the problem as one o f
global poverty caused b y insufficient access to knowledge (Denning, 2007). This means
that a key strategy to solving it w o u l d be to increase the access to knowledge. Similarly,
the pro-chancellor and chair of the G o v e r n i n g Council of Osun State U n i v e r s i t y i n
Osogbo, Nigeria, Professor Peter O k e b u k o l a defineda lack o f high-quality teachers as
akey education problem facing Nigeria. He asserted that the problem of teacher inad-
o o n resulted from the l o w prestige accorded to the teaching profession a n d the mass
i us oft r a i n e d teachers to Europe, N o r t h America, andA s i a . Givenh i s diagnosis of
an fpoblem, it is n o t surprising that he wants to establish a nationalq u a l i t y assurance
Vea utoring system f o r teachers and recommends policies that he anticipates w o u l d
Un; impact on teacher q u a l i t y (Ogundare, 2010). Similarly, m a n y policymakers i n

hited States have defined the gap between the achievement scores of w h i t e and
students as a problem. They have often diagnosed that problem as beinga result o f
34 Chapter2 ©
Getting Started at the Beginning
an inadequate supply of highly qualified teachers. Given that definition of the prob]
it is not surprising that strategies to increase the supply of h i g h l y qualifieg teach ut
would be pursued. For example, in Minnesota, both Democratic and Republican ke
islators sponsoreda b i l l in 2011 to promote alternative teacher licensure in that state -
In the examples described here, education leaders are more likely to be succe:
f u l i n persuading other decision makers of their view of the w o r l d if they are able.
present relevant data, take advantage of pertinent events, and allow opportunity § 0
feedback. "
POLITICS STREAM. The politics stream details the balance of power and resources that
exist in the policy-making system. This balance can influence which problem definition
is carried downstream to the governmental agenda. The governmental agenda isa list
of policy items on which decision makers are seriously considering action. This stream
is a combination of partisan and electoral politics as well as the actions of special interest
groups. To stay above water, education leaders need to be aware of the national mood,
potential avenues of interest, group pressure, and the desires of individuals or groups
w i t h a great deal of political clout (Kingdon, 1995), This does not mean that you have to
buckle under the pressure of powerful groups or individuals. It does mean, however,
that you must have an understanding of political processes and the constraints that
they may place on the feasibility of your decisions. The technical merit of your argu-
ment may not be sufficient in selecting the appropriate course of action. You must also
consider the balance of power and values that make some choices untenable, regardless
of their potential effectiveness in solving an identified problem.
Why should education leaders care? As an education leader, your framing of the
policy problem can influence h o w the issue is viewed by those who set the legislative
agenda and establish rules. If a condition is not being seriously considered by policy-
makers, then there is little likelihood that there w i l l be collective action to change it.
Being aware of the political dimensions of policy analysis allows you to offer meaning:
f u l problem definitions that fellow leaders consider actionable. For example, after pub-
lication of A Nation at Risk in 1983 (National Commission on Excellence in Education,
1983), education leaders in the United States could create more interest in addressing
education problems when they framed their concern as a quest for improving student
performance. Similarly, efforts to address bullying and school security received more
attention after the 1999 mass shootings in a high school in Columbine, Colorado, in the
United States. In addition, w i t h the rise of standards-based accountability policies, the
demand for more phonetic and less whole-language approaches to literacy has been
more appealing to those w h o set the agenda (e.g., McDonnell, 2009).
POLICY STREAM. The p o l i c y stream captures the d i f f e r e n t alternatives that exist. This
stream is the most easily aligned w i t h the w o r k of p o l i c y analysis: the quest f o r an alter-
n a t i v e t h a t i m p r o v e s societal conditions. I t is especially i m p o r t a n t f o r education leaders
to be active participants i n this process because t h e y h a v e the k n o w l e d g e a n d insight to
c o n t r i b u t e to the a p p r o p r i a t e selection of alternatives. This stream is the one in w.
the skills of the p o l i c y analysis process are f u l l y b r o u g h t to bear. The plethora of ideas
advanced i n the p r o b l e m s a n d politics streams are sorted a n d o r g a n i z e d i n order to
gauge w h i c h ones meet the needs of the c o m m u n i t y m o s t a p p r o p r i a t e l y . Education
leaders are essential i n g u i d i n g this process.
Chapter 2 ©
Why should educationleaders care? The proposals to address policy change are dis-
sected, analyzed, modified, discarded, or used in the policy stream. Your roles as an
education leader is important in bringing to light the ideas that take into account the
full needs of your community.T h e act of policy development, which is the w o r k of
the policy stream, allows education leaders t o devise rational, persuasive arguments
on the proposed alternative. As noted by Kingdon (1995), problems are less likely to
pe addressed if policymakers do not see viable solutions for solving them. For exam-
Je, education leaders long expressed concern over the equity of school finance i n the
United States. However, it was n o t u n t i l Coons, Clune, and Sugarman (1970) p r o v i d e d
the courts w i t h a w o r k i n g definition of h o w to measure equity that plaintiffs i n school
finance lawsuits had a chance at v i c t o r y (e.g., Serrano v, Priest, 1971).
The merging of the problem, political, and policy streams can account for the poli-
cies that are adopted. When we study and try to understand the context of the struggle
in any one of these policy-making processes, understanding the politics of education
and the underlying theories and applications are important. In the study of policy anal-
ysis,however, the focus is on the characterization of existing unsatisfactory conditions.
The focus of education leaders interested primarily in policy analysis would be on the
policy stream, where alternatives are refined.
It is important to be aware o f the political phases i n the p o l i c y process and to note
key overlaps w i t h policy analysis as a method. Consequently, this chapter also includes
abrief discussion of the c o m m o n l y accepted stages of the p o l i c y process.
STAGES OF THE P O L I C Y - M A K I N G PROCESS
The policy-making process generally encompasses six to eight phases. Fowler (2009)
identifies the six stages of the policy process as issue definition, agenda setting, pol-
icy formulation, policy adoption, policy implementation, and policy evaluation. Dunn
(2004, p. 45) describes them more broadly and adds policy adaptation, policy succes-
sion, and policy termination among the stages completed during policy making. Dunn?s
last three additions differ somewhat from the rest of the process because I consider
them to be subcategories of policy evaluation. That is, based on their assessment ofp a r -
ticular programs and policies, policymakers may decide to adapt existing policy action
(adaptation), redirect the goal of that action (succession), or cut the program altogether
(termination).
Issue D e f i n i t i o n
Issue definition is the start of the policy-making process as well as the policy analyti-
cal process. As noted already, not all negative conditions are policy problems or policy
?sues. A key transformation of a negative condition is evidence that the phenomenon
actually exists and that i t has sufficient negative implications for the community as a
Who so that members care if it is not resolved. For example, education leaders have
ong had concerns about the equity of schooling offered to poor students, students w i t h
»Pecial needs, and high achievers. There is also concern about the quality of education
y e Provided to ensure that the United States is on the top rung of the achievement
bo €r Marking education performance. This concern has resulted i n a variety of re-
t s and Policies, including the Elementary a n d Secondary Education A c t (ESEA) i n
1965, w h i c h d e f i n e d the issue as p o o r c h i l d r e n n o t d o i n g as w e l l i n schoo] as the;

w e a l t h y peers. It has also resulted i n the I n d i v i d u a l s w i t h Disability Act first Note
rized i n 1974, w h i c h defined the problem as inappropriate education being o f f autho,
students w i t h special needs. Definitions also i n c l u d e the m e d i o c r i t y of the ed ered tp
system, as p r o m p t e d by the 1983 report A Nation at Risk, w h i c h led to anincreases n
icies at all levels of governance i n the United States emphasizing improved stand Pol.
This emphasis on excellence and accountability also influenced the teauthorisns .
ESEA i n 2001 and led to the redefinition of a variety of education problems in an of

C h i l d Left Behind A c t of 2001. This stage of the p o l i c y - m a k i n g process takes placein ne
problem stream, and m u c h of the chapter discussion of that subject applies hero
also analogous to the problem definition step in p o l i c y analysis. -Itig
Agenda Setting
N o t all p o l i c y issues are going to be acted on b y a government. K i n g d o n (1995) Notes

that v i s i b l e participants i n the political system, such as politicians, are more likely to
define the issue that make it to the agenda, w h i l e h i d d e n participants (e.g, analysts)
are m o r e l i k e l y to influence the solutions to these problems. Visible participants are 5
called because their influence on p o l i c y m a k i n g is p u b l i c , assumed, and obvious be
cause o f their role as elected leaders. H i d d e n participants are so described because they
are less l i k e l y to be k n o w n b y the general population. Their impact on policy via their
influence o n proposals and u n d e r l y i n g scholarship is often less publicized.
Education leaders may be visible or hidden participants. Visible participants in.
clude elected leaders or leaders appointed at high levels of government. For example,
many governors have billed themselves as education governors; two examples are for-
mer governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas and former governor George W. Bush of Texas. In
addition, elected members of school boards who are more involved in policy directives
than in the day-to-day running of the district are also examples of visible participants.
Examples of hidden participants are the practitioners responsible for implementing the
policy, scholars who have developed proposals to address problematic conditions, and
civil servants working behind the scenes. Leaders of grassroots organizations, unions,
and various special interest groups may be visible or hidden depending on the public-
ity that surrounds their actions and analysis.
Legislators are responsible for placing policy issues on the public agenda. Policy
analysts can influence the agenda by informing the definition of a policy issue adopted
by policymakers. If an issue does not make it to the agenda, it w i l l not have a policy
generated explicitly to resolve it. This stage in the policy-making process isanalogous
to the need to make the case in the policy analysis process. However, getting an issue
onto the governmental agenda is not sufficient. It does not guarantee that suitable al
ternatives for resolving the problematic condition w i l l be proposed. Thesealternative
would have to have the appropriate words to describe what needs to be done and func
ing to support those actions. That is the role of policy formulation.
Policy F o r m u l a t i o n
In this phase of the political process, officials formulate alternatives to address ;
problem. As noted b y Dunn (2004) and Fowler (2009), these policies may be ?cies
f o r m of executive orders, court decisions, and statutes. The formulation of po
Chapter 2 © Getting Started at the Beginning 37
shus captures i n w r i t i n g the r e q u i r e d approach Proposed to resolve the issue being

add ressed. For y o u as an education leader, this stage i n the p o l i c y - m a k i n g process
compasses the p o l i c y a n a l y t i c a l tasks of establishing y o u r intrinsic values, t h i n k -
i n of alternatives, and w e i g h i n g those alternatives against the considerations that
ou deem i m p o r t a n t , I n e x p l o r i n g options, it is essential f o r education leaders to
remember the condition that t h e y w o u l d like to solve. Education leaders m u s t con-
tinue to focus their efforts on s o l v i n g the p r o b l e m rather than on g a i n i n g allegiance
toaparticular strategy f o r s o l v i n g t h a t problem.
policy A d o p t i o n
[tis not enough to capture i n w o r d s the recommended strategy o f dealing w i t h a p o l i c y

issue. There also needs to be f o r m a l acceptance of those words b y the appropriate au-
thorizing body. In the conduct of p o l i c y analysis, the likelihood of one approach b e i n g
supported or opposed is an integral part of the p o l i c y analytical process and underlies
the recommendation that stems f r o m the policy analysis process. That is, analysts need
to gauge the feasibility of t h e i r proposed solution being adopted. T h e i r assessment
plays a crucial role i n the recommendations made. In p o l i c y analysis, w h e n education
leaders make recommendations and persuade relevant stakeholders that their decision
is the proper one, they i n f o r m the policy adoption stage i n the policy-making arena.
Policy I m p l e m e n t a t i o n
Policy implementation is the stage of the policy process where proposed actions are
finally realized. In early policy research, we often focused on the political likelihood of
a policy being adopted. Less explored was its implementation. Dunn (2004) indicates,
for example, that an adopted policy is carried out by administrative units. Firestone
(1989) notes that the rewards and consequences for the actors in this stage of the pro-
cess are different from those for key players in the policy adoption phase. This phase
of policy making presents many rewards and challenges to education leaders. A t this
stage, leaders are better able to see if they made a difference in the community and
tesolved the problem identified. The implementation and monitoring plans developed
by education leaders are an important analogue to the implementation stage of the
policy-making process.
Policy E v a l u a t i o n
Policy evaluation is the stage of the policy-making process in w h i c h the feedback loop is
tequired for education leaders to assess if the policy change that was implemented actu-
ally worked. This part of the process calls for a clear delineation of the goals and the objec-
tives of the policy i n order to have a standard b y w h i c h to determine the policy?s effective-
Ness. Weiler (1990) asserts that policy evaluation is essentially political because evaluation
Tequires the explicit use of values i n j u d g i n g whether a program was successful,

Policy evaluation a l l o w s us to answer the question, ?Did it work?? D i d it w o r k ? is
€ question that must u l t i m a t e l y be asked of any policy. A s i m p o r t a n t as p o l i c y evalu-
a t i o n is to both policy m a k i n g a n d p o l i c y analysis, however, it is n o t the entire process.
A Mistake made b y m a n y students i n the p o l i c y analysis process is that they start w i t h
aN existing policy. They assume that the p o l i c y analysis process s i m p l y means that t h e y
38 Chapter2 © Getting Started at the Beginning
i .
A p p r o x i m a t e M a t c h b e t w e e n S t a n d a r d P h a s e s D e s c r i b e d in theP o i
M a k i n g P r o c e s s Literature a n d S t e p s in t h e PolicyA n a l y s i s P r o c e s s cy.
P o l i c y - M a k i n g Phases Steps in PolicyA n a l y s i s ~
Issue definition Define the problem.

Agenda setting Make the case.
Policy formulation Establish your driving values,
Develop alternatives.
Weigh the options.
Policy adoption Make recommendations.
Persuade your audience.
Policy implementation Implement the solution.
Monitor outputs.
Policy evaluation Evaluate outcomes.
Source: Compiled by author based on literature.
conduct an assessment of whether an existing policy w o r k e d o r not. However,policy

analysis is more than policy evaluation; the distinction is important. Evaluation occurs
toward the end of the policy analytical process and examines ways i n which proposed
alternatives were effective, if at all. Policy analysis goes beyond the assessment of policy
proposals. A t its best, it assesses the policy problem that these solutions were designed
to solve.
P O L I C Y A N A L Y S I S 1S N O T P O L I C Y E V A L U A T I O N
Focusing o n t h e Problem
When students come into the policy analysis class, they are often passionate about the
effectiveness, or lack thereof, of a particular policy. They are excited about document-
ing w h y they so strongly support o r oppose ap a r t i c u l a r policy. Quite often, they are
passionately opposed. This attention to existing policies often turns the focus of the
students away from the problem that the policy was intended to solve in the first place.
Instead of addressing a problem that needs resolution, the policy analysis process be-
comes distilled into s i m p l y being an evaluative process. Even i f their evaluations are
done systematically, students still have no clear rationale on w h y the option examined
was the most appropriate solution to resolve the policy issue that they really care about.
In other words, b y focusing solely on one of the potential solutions to a particularprob-
lem, instead of the problem itself, students are committing what D u n n (2004) describes
as a Type I I I error; that is, the students solve the w r o n g problem. For example, when
students care about the costs of higher education but start their analysis bydefining the
problem as an inappropriate tax code, their efforts are focused on the w r o n g condition.
The solution to the problem, as they state it, w o u l d be to fix the tax code. However, fix-
ing the tax code m a y n o t lead to any change in the costs of higher education. I f students
really care about reducing the costs of higher education, the costs of higher education
jould be the starto f their policyanalysis. To focus on refining a solution that may not
pe the most appropriate for addressing the problem limits the utility of the policy ana-
lytical process. .
Education leaders m a y c o m p l a i n that they do n o t like u n f u n d e d mandates, N o

Child Left Behind, b u d g e t cuts, state standards, u n i o n contracts, and so on. H o w e v e r ,
their focus should be on the conditions that they w o u l d like to change, n o t the strategies
used to address them. By approaching p o l i c y analysis as problem analysis, education
Jeaders can better ensuret h a t they are n o t distracted b y the means to a solution a n d can
focus instead on the conditions that they w o u l d like to change.
policy E v a l u a t i o n
pOLICY EVALUATION AS FEEDBACK. W h e n y o u start w i t h an existing p o l i c y rather than

the condition that y o u w o u l d like to change, policy evaluation can p r o v i d e feedback o r
summative results. F o r m a t i v e evaluations are conducted w h e n assessments p r o v i d e
feedback early enough i n the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n process that those w h o are carrying o u t
the policy can respond. I n the field of education, an example of formative evaluation
is the use of computer-assisted instruction. Yeh (2006) describes the evaluative process
when he illustrates h o w teachers can use computers to p r o v i d e rapid feedback to t h e i r
students. He found that investing i n this reform strategy often leads to h i g h e r s t u d e n t
motivation, less frustration, and l o w e r failure rates. While these findings are i m p o r t a n t ,
itis important to distinguish between questions that ask if a policy works and questions
that explore w h a t working means. The answers to the latter questions require a clear
definition of the problem.
POLICY EVALUATION AS SUMMATIVE JUDGMENT. Policy evaluation may also be sum-

mative and used to determine i f a program should be adapted, continued, or termi-
nated. As noted earlier, policy adaptation occurs when leaders adapt the initial solution
that was adopted to address a problem. For example, policymakers in Kentucky revised
the funding mechanisms used for their elementary and secondary schools in response
to the court's findings that the system for funding schools in that state was inadequate
(see Rose v. Council for Better Education, 790 S.W.2d 186).
Policy succession occurs when the original problem for which a policy was pro-
posed has evolved or disappeared. In that case, rather than getting rid of thep o l i c y
altogether, policymakers may decide to direct the efforts of program administrators to
resolving a new policy problem, Leaders then shift the focus of existing programs or
Policies to address another problematic condition. An illustrative educational exam-
ple is the creation and transformation of the desegregation rule i n Minnesota and its
Companion integration revenue program statute. In its original conceptualization, the
esota State Board of Education established a 30% cap on ethnic m i n o r i t y students
for all Minnesota public schools. Schools that exceeded this ceiling were r e q u i r e d to
submit a desegregation p l a n to the Minnesota Department o f Education or face finan-
?lal sanctions, The sanctions w e r e to dissuade district leaders f r o m v i o l a t i n g the r u l e
by not having more systemic o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r ethnic integration. By the 1990s, de-
pee aphic changes i n the state?s t w o largest school districts, Minneapolis and Saint
a e signaled a n e w set of challenges to ethnic integration that w o u l d eventually af-
e ct many of the m e t r o p o l i t a n school districts w i t h i n the state. These c o m m u n i t i e s
*perienced increasingly h i g h p r o p o r t i o n s of students of color, and i f p o l i c y m a k e r s

enforced the 30% cap on m i n o r i t y students, then education leaders i nM i n n e

St. Paul w o u l d have had to t u r n away their o w n neighborhood students,T h e o s ang
p o p u l a t i o n from w h i c h they d r e w often was m o r e than 30% minority. To add, Stu ent
challenge, policymakers revised the statutes so that the integration stan,dard f
be based on the relationship of the school to the district i n w h i c h it is locateq ? u d

than on the school?s ethnic integration vis-a-vis the state?sa r b i t r a r y cap. That Tather
Minnesota State Board of Education p r o h i b i t e d schools w i t h i na districtf r o mf a the
a m i n o r i t y population that was 15% above the district?s average. Consequent} Ving
than placing an absolute cap on the percentage of m i n o r i t y enrollments, schoo
to ensure that their m i n o r i t y populations were n o t v e r y different (defined asan had
more than 15%) f r o m the average of the district i n w h i c h it was located. As m e
populations i n the metropolitan areas continued to g r o w dramatically, b u t asymmae
cally w i t h i n and among districts, it became increasingly d i f f i c u l t for policymaker?
establish ethnic i n t e g r a t i o n standards that c o u l d be f a i r l y and equally addresseq °
all school officials. By 2002, the desegregation rule remained, b u t theMinnesotal e e
islature n o w a l l o w e d v o l u n t a r y p a r t i c i p a t i o n of school districts into existing inte é
tion collaboratives. A l o n g w i t h the use of a p p r o p r i a t i o n policies f o r state revere
designated specifically f o r the i m p r o v e m e n t of.ethnic integration, the new 80al of the
desegregation rule is n o w s i m p l y to increase interracial contact, a term that state poli-
cymakers have n o t defined concretely.
U s i n g s u m m a t i v e evaluation, p o l i c y m a k e r s and administrators m a ydetermine
t h a t a p r o g r a m o r p o l i c y is no longer necessary. This was the case i n WakeCounty,
N o r t h Carolina, where b o a r d members changed the l a w on integration, Another ex.
a m p l e o f a l a w b e i n g t e r m i n a t e d (repealed) is i n M i n n e s o t a , w h e r e the Minnesota
B o a r d o f E d u c a t i o n h a d created a set o f rules i n 1993 labeled the profile of learning,
w h i c h w e r e o f f i c i a l l y adopted i n 1998. These rules w e r e i n t e n d e d to offer s e t of
a
s t a t e w i d e standards that w o u l d increase t h e q u a l i t y of e d u c a t i o n offered i n Minnesota

b y m a k i n g c o u r s e w o r k a n d g r a d i n g m o r e consistent across the state. By 2003, the
M i n n e s o t a legislature repealed the p o l i c y because it w a s determined that the policy
d i d n o t p r o v i d e a g o o d a v e n u e f o r e n s u r i n g excellence f o r M i n n e s o t a students.
Going Beyond Evaluation
Policy analysis is policy evaluation, w r i t large. That is, policy analysis is not sim-
p l y about whether a policy worked; it entails the completion of 10 essential and
iterative steps, o f w h i c h the evaluation of outcomes is s i m p l y one part of a very
important whole, As noted b y Fowler (2009) and others, the purpose of evaluation
is to see i f individuals are doing w h a t they are supposed to or if policies work the
w a y they are supposed to. The first purpose addresses simple compliance; the se-
ond addresses the question of effectiveness. However, education leaders will be ut"
able to address the effectiveness of programs unless they are weighed againstt heir
a b i l i t y to resolve the problem that they were implemented to address.This brings
us back to where we started the discussion: Policy analysis should be viewed
p r o b l e m analysis. The place to start is w i t h identification of the problem. Howerne
p o l i c y analysis is not o n l y about pointing out w h a t is w r o n g w i t h the world. It 1 es
process b y w h i c h options to make the w o r l d better are offered. The chapter ¢ 0
w i t h an o v e r v i e w of the other steps in the policy analysis process.
Chapter 2 © Getting Started at the Beginning 41
THE STEPS T O P O L I C Y A N A L Y S I S
The c r a f t o f P o l i c yA n a l y s i s
a
Many P olicy researchersn o t e t h a tp o l i c y analysis is n o t science. Bardach (2009) writes
that itis ?more art than science? (p. xvi). Patton and Sawicki (1993) concur and add that
asicp o l i c y analysis is ?craft rather than science? (p. 4). These researchers and others
agree that there are key steps that m u s t be covered i n order to i m p r o v e the q u a l i t y of
the policya n a l y t i c a l process. The analogy that I often d r a w on i n class is the b a k i n g of
acake. Somei n g r e d i e n t s are key components of the cake-making process, b u t if a baker
wants to bake ap a r t i c u l a rf l a v o r o f cake, it helps to have a recipe that can be adapted.
Education leaders must be f a m i l i a r w i t h the basic policy recipe, b u t they m u s t be flex-
ible to make changes as necessary.
K e y Q u e s t i o n s o f t h e P o l i c y A n a l y s i s Process
Itis also important to recognize t h a t p r o v i d i n g steps i n the analytical process is a w a y to

make that process pedagogically helpful, and it is helpful to remember that the process
is invariably not as mechanistic as i m p l i e d b y the description. Instead, it is often organic
and always iterative. Three major questions guide the policy analysis process, a n d they -
involve how, what, and w h o questions. The first question is, H o w are decisions made?
That is, what process is used? For example, the process described i n the b o o k f o l l o w s
a rational, goal-oriented, step-by-step approach. The second question is, W h a t criteria
are used? For example, w h a t are the d r i v i n g values that w i l l help education leaders
not only define p o l i c y problems b u t come u p w i t h solutions? The t h i r d questions is,
Who gets to make that determination? For example, as education leaders consider vari-
ous constraints on resolving problems, whose values, whose benefits, and w h o s e costs
count? The answers to these three questions v a r y and often depend on the reason f o r
doing the analysis in the first place.
Creating a P o l i c y A n a l y s i s R o a d m a p
Researchers vary on the exact n u m b e r of steps i n the policy analysis process. H o w e v e r ,

the key features of the process are essentially the same. That is, a problem m u s t be
identified; you m u s t decide h o w y o u w i l l choose among the alternatives to solve the
problem; you m u s t i d e n t i f y the alternatives f r o m w h i c h you w i l l choose. A s an analyst,
you will let readers k n o w h o w w e l l each alternative fared w h e n weighed against con-
siderations that y o u (or y o u r boss, o r y o u r constituents, o r other stakeholders) t h i n k
are important. Based on that analysis, y o u w i l l select one of the alternatives and then,
if change is to occur, you w i l ! implement the selected alternative. This process is some-
what analogous to the one used i n choosing the w i n n e r on American Idol o r America?s
Next Top Model. That is, based on y o u r understanding of w h a t is good o r bad, y o u w i l l
consistently eliminate the least workable options u n t i l there is a solution that balances
t h e criteria of a group. The benefit of learning these analytical methods i n the classroom
is that you have some exposure to f o r m a l policy analysis w h i l e y o u are still i n school.
For example, w i n t e r conditions d o n o t exist i n Jamaica, b u t members o f the Jamaican
bobsled team were still able to adapt the r u d i m e n t s of bobsledding to the particular
conditions that they face b y practicing on sand instead of snow. This unusual t r a i n i n g
t came to light w h e n the Jamaican bobsled team was the first from a tropical country
42 Chapter 2 * Getting Started at the Beginning
to participate i n the 1988 W i n t e r Olympics in Calgary, Canada.T h i s story was made fa.
m o u s in the 1993 f i l m Cool Runnings. Since then, m a n y m o r e participants from tropical
climates practice for and participate in the W i n t e r Olympics.W h i l e some of these Steps
m a y feel mechanistic and unrealistic w h i l e you are s t u d y i n g them i n school, they will
offer the basic elements for conducting soundp o l i c y analysis
wat
and they w i l l allow you to : .
m a k e b e t t e r p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s i n the m o r e c o m p l e x c o n d i t i o n s o f f e r e d i nr e a l i t y .
TEN STEPS OF POLICY ANALYSIS. The 10 steps of the policy analytical process that wij]
be explored and described more fully in this text are (1) define the problem, (2) make the
case, (3) establish your driving values, (4) develop alternatives, (5) weigh the options
(6) make recommendations, (7) persuade your audience, (8) implement the solution,
(9) monitor outputs, and (10) evaluate outcomes.
1. Define the Problem. The first step in thep o l i c y analysis process is define the
problem. By defining the problem, education leaders focus attention on the social con-
d i t i o n that m u s t be changed i n order to i m p r o v e society. The definition of the problem
sets the course for the goal of analysis, the v i a b i l i t y of alternatives considered, and how
success is defined. A s you define a problem, you can do so i n terms of its scope: how
m a n y people are affected and to w h a t degree, key stakeholders, and the degree of in-
fluence that policymakers m a y have in making a change. This step is covered in more
detail i n Chapter 3.
2. Make the Case. The essence of policy analysis is i d e n t i f y i n g choices that lead to
the o p t i m a l resolution of a problem. It is n o t enough, h o w e v e r , to p o i n t o u t problems
and to i d e n t i f y solutions if others are n o t persuaded b y y o u r analysis. Policymakers
often disagree about the appropriate choices to be made regarding public policy. It is
imperative that policy analysts demonstrate that the facts s u p p o r t their description of
the w o r l d and, ultimately, their solution to what they f i n d w r o n g w i t h it. Consequently,
p o l i c y analysis requires evidence-based strategies because it is m o r e convincing to
p o i n t to facts than to rely on intuition. H o w to assemble these facts i n a meaningful way
so that they become transformed into persuasive evidence is the subject of Chapter 4.
The choices you make regarding problem defini-

3, Establish Your Driving Values.
tions, alternatives, and implemented strategy w i l l be grounded in the values that you
or other decision makers bring to the analysis. While values reflect your ideals, criteria
are concrete, working definitions of these ideals. In determining evaluative criteria,
you may want to look at the cost of various alternatives, the net benefits associated
w i t h the outcomes of those evaluative criteria, the administrative ease associated with
implementing each alternative, and so on. In essence, the criteria that you select say
something about the assumptions you are making regarding the role of society, g0V-
ernment, and the economy. The driving values that shape your choices and the criteria
derived from them are discussed more fully in Chapter 5.
4. Develop Alternatives.
Alternatives are the policy options that you are considering
to resolve the problem hand. They describe the interventions you are taking into ac-
at
count to resolve or alleviate the negative condition that you identified. Alternatives a r
not to be confused with the outcomes sought and are always a means to an end; they are
not ends in and of themselves. Alternatives detail how you plan to mitigate the negative
condition that you have identified as a policy issue. In coming up w i t h alternatives,
Chapter
2 ©
ou are developing ap a r t i c u l a r action or package of actions that w i l l help to address

the problem. The pracess by which you develop alternatives is discussed more fully in
Chapter6.
5, Weigh the Options.Steps 3 and 4 w i l l result i n a set of alternatives from which
ou will choose one based o n the criteria you have deemed important. Making the eval-
uation of alternatives explicit is an important policy analytical step because it enhances
accountability. Reduced accountability reduces the credibility of the results stemming
from the policy analysis process. Reduced credibility often lessens the ability of educa-
tion leaders to persuade a community that the path chosen is the appropriate one. One
of the primary tasks i n weighing your options is to be explicit and grounded about the
rationale underlying your evaluation. Chapter 7 offers guidelines on how to consider
and articulate the rationale used to weigh policy options.
6. Make Recommendations. This step differs from simply weighing options because
it incorporates the information from step 5 and provides bases b y which you can in-
dicate clearly and explicitly the preferred alternative. This step reflects the normative,
multifaceted, and iterative nature of the policy analytical process. Step 5 focused on
how you would weigh policy alternatives; this step focuses on how you would then de-
cide on the appropriate policy. In essence, this step allows you to ?test your work,? thus
ensuring the coherence of your evaluative argument. The discussion in Chapter 8 about
making recommendations also delves more deeply into the appropriate role of policy
analysts in this process once they have evaluated the alternatives.
7. Persuade Your Audience. Before you can move on to implementing a policy, you
.
have to persuade relevant decision makers about its suitability. A key step in policy
analysis is communicating decisions to key stakeholders. Important parts of commu-
nicating your analysis are being aware of the structure of policy arguments; knowing
the different modes of policy arguments; and, perhaps most important, understanding
your audience. This step differs somewhat from step 2, making the case, because that
step asked you to look more closely at assembling the data. This step looks more closely
at communicating that information once the decision about the appropriate policy strat-
egy is made. The art of communication is covered more fully in Chapter 9.
8. Implementthe Solution. For policies to have an impact, they must be carried out.
While implementation is not equivalent to outcome, managing the implementation pro-
cess bolsters the chance that the enacted policy w i l l yield the results sought. Enacted
policies are not implemented for many reasons. This step ensures that education leaders
pay attention to the implementation process and anticipate challenges that may arise. A
full discussion of this step, including an overview of the stages of implementation, bar-
Tiers to implementation, leadership challenges, and a guide to creating an implementa-
tion plan, appears i n Chapter 10.
9. Monitor Outputs. Policy analysis is about addressing a problematic condition.
To k n o w h o w e f f e c t i v e y o u r e f f o r t s a r e at r e s o l v i n g t h e p r o b l e m , y o u h a v e t o d o c u -
Ment relevant aspects o f its context. M o n i t o r i n g offers i n f o r m a t i o n o n w h a t h a p p e n e d
and informs a n a l y t i c a l decisions on h o w it h a p p e n e d and w h y . It is the p e n u l t i m a t e
Step in the p o l i c y a n a l y t i c a l process a n d connects the actions o u t l i n e d i n the i m p l e -
C h e o n p l a n w i t h p o l i c y objectives. M o n i t o r i n g o u t p u t s is discussed m o r e f u l l y i n
apter 11.
44 Chapter 2 ¢ Getting Started at the Beginning
10. Evaluate Outcomes. Evaluation focuses on t h e achievement of goals ang O b j ec.
tives, and produces i n f o r m a t i o n about the value of p o l i c y outcomes. In that Procesg

y o u m a y revisit w h e t h e r t h eo r i g i n a l goals w e r e w o r t h w h i l e . However, evaluationi ,
n o t necessarily about assessing the value of p o l i c y goals b u t gauging h o w well the ol.
icy actually achieved them. Revising the goals w o u l d essentially e n t a i l a reevaluation
of the problem statement, w h i c h is a function oft h e entire policya n a l y t i c Process, no}
just the f o r m a l evaluative step. While actual evaluation occurs afterimplementation (ex
post), it is imperative to have an evaluation p l a n f r o m the outset.T h i s step is essential
f o r education leaders to consider because it offers them an o p p o r t u n i t y to provide clear
guidance on w h a t constitutes an i m p r o v e m e n t of the problematic condition.Evaluating
outcomes is discussed m o r e f u l l y in Chapter 12.
S t e p p i n g - S t o n e s o f Policy Analysis
Education leaders should view the 10 steps as stepping-stones i n the policy analysis pro-
cess b u t n o t treat them as if they, or the order in w h i c h they are presented here, are set
i n stone. Maybe you w i l l find it useful to t h i n k of the alternatives before you establish
y o u r d r i v i n g values. Maybe you think communicating w i t h y o u r audience is part and
parcel of making y o u r case. The process is iterative, and y o u m a y find yourself doing the
steps out of order or repeating them again and again. F o l l o w the basic process, which
w i l l a l l o w you to focus on the policy problem and to devise alternatives that resolve it,
As y o u go through the details of the list, you w i l l have a clearer idea o f h o w the pieces
of the policy analysis puzzle f i t together and h o w they can clarify y o u r decision process,
Chapter Summary
Policy analysis is n o t simply policy evaluation; it In this chapter, w e have explored the pol-
covers several steps, of w h i c h evaluation is just icy analysis process. We have addressed what
it is and what it is not. We have looked at how
one part. Policy analysis is n o t policy making.
policy analysis can intersect w i t h policy making.
There is overlap between the policy-making pro-
Next, w e w i l l discuss h o w to start the analyti-
cess and the policy analytical process, but they are
cal process w i t h the d e f i n i t i o n of the problem,
n o t identical. The policy-making process is largely w h i c h is the focus of the n e x t chapter. In start-
entrenched in politics and focuses on the deci- ing the analysis, remember that a policy issue is
sion makers and the struggle to have one?s values one i n w h i c h there is a condition that needs to
backed b y the authoritative role of government. be changed, this condition can be changed using
By contrast, policy analysis is often perceived to communal resources, it should be changed using
be a m o r e technical process and potentially less communal resources, and f o r w h i c h there is dis-
contentious, although there is disagreement in the agreement about the most appropriate strategy
literature on whether policy analysis is as neutral for change.
as some earlier researchers had claimed.
Review Questions
1. What is policy analysis? 3. What are the steps in the policy analytical
2. A s a policy analyst, what do you think are process? Are there any you would a d or
some o f the challenges in identifying educa- omit? Why?
t i o n policy problems in m o d e r n society?
Chapter 2 ©
_
How would you transform an education con- 7. A t the beginning of the chapter, you were
dition into a policy issue? Provide an example. introduced to Dr. K n o w and were asked
.
Prepare a r e f l e c t i v e c r i t i q u e o f the p o l i c y how to make sure that he was getting at the
analysis process a n d y o u r place i n it using heart of policy analysis. H o w w o u l d you
the reading materials assigned. have framed the p r o b l e m facing the dis-
.
What are some of the major pitfalls i n con- trict? Has your framing changed after read-
ducting policy analysis? ing this chapter? Explain h o w and why.
"
News Story for Analysis
12-State Study Finds Falloff i n Testing Gains A f t e r In math, the new s t u d y found a rise i n
NCLB. Education Week. August 1, 2007. SECTION: achievement since passage of the NCLB law i n the
Pg. 9 Vol. 26 No. 44. 12 states studied: Arkansas, California, Illinois,
Since the enactment of the N o Child Left lowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nebraska, N e w
Behind law, test-score improvement among 4th Jersey, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and
graders in 12 states has fallen off in reading and Washington state.
slowed in math, according to a new study. Between 2002 and 2006, the study shows,
The paper also cites National Assessment scores on the 12 states? tests registered an un-
of Educational Progress [NAEP] scores reflecting weighted mean growth rate o f 2.4 percentage
a virtual halt to progress in closing racial achieve- points in math proficiency. But the researcher
ment gaps in reading since the federal law was noted that growth was slower after 2003 than it had
signed in 2002. been before passage of the NCLB law.
The research, which draws on data from both ?Sustained gains in math post-NCLB offer
state tests and the federally administered NAEP, is a bright glimmer of hope that federal policy can
sure to add fuel to the heated debate over the con- make a difference inside classrooms,? Mr. Fuller
troversial law as Congress prepares to take up its said in an e-mail. ,
reauthorization. The new research follows a June study by

?Over the past four years, ?No Child? pro- the Washington-based Center on Education Policy
ponents have made very strong claims that this that found consistent and significant increases in
reform is raising student achievement,? said lead state-test scores since the legislation became law in
author Bruce Fuller, a professor of education January 2002.
and public policy at the University of California, Mr. Fuller found fault w i t h the CEP study's
Berkeley, and the director of the Policy Analysis reliance on state tests alone, which he said were
for California Education research center based at less trustworthy gauges of progress than long-
Berkeley and Stanford University. ?In fact, after range NAEP data?especially on reading.
NCLB, earlier progress made by the states actually When asked to comment on Mr. Fuller?s new
petered out.? analysis, CEP President Jack Jennings defended ?the
Mr. Fuller said that pattern emerged from state tests as ?more accurate barometers of whether
his examination of pre-NCLB state test data as well kids are learning what the state thinks is important.?
as results from the long-term NAEP. But he does
not suggest that the NCLB law is responsible for Reading Gap S u s t a i n e d
the reading-achievement stagnation and math-gain
slowdown that he says occurred in the 12 states Katherine McLane, the press secretary for the U.S. -
since the 1990s, Department of Education, took issue w i t h Mr.

Fuller?s conclusions.
The study, published in the July issue of
Edticational Researcher, a peer-reviewed journal ?The fact is that No Child Left Behind is work-
of the Washington-based American Educational ing,? she said. ?What the report seems not to account
Research Association, joins a thicket of recent re- for is that a law that affects tens of thousands of
Ports on achievement levels since the federal law schools all over America can?t be implemented over-
. took effect. night and its effects are not immediate.?
O n the a c h i e v e m e n t gap, M r . Fuller's s t u d y m a t h a c h i e v e m e n t gap even after passage oft h e

p o i n t e d to n a t i o n a l N A E P data s h o w i n g t h a t i n federal law.
math, A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n 4th graders closed the gap I n reading, h o w e v e r , M r . F u l l e r pointeg to
w i t h w h i t e students b y more than half a grade level national N A E P data s h o w i n g that black and Latino ?
b e t w e e n 1992 and 2003. But it h i g h l i g h t e d the fact students? 4th grade reading proficiency has notap-
that n o f u r t h e r progress w a s made i n 2005. Latino preciably n a r r o w e d the g a p w i t h w h i t e students?
4th graders, he observed, continued to close the scores u n d e r the N C L B law.
Source: As appeared in Education Week (Vol. 26, Issue 44, Page 9). Reprinted with permission from Editorial Projects in?
Education.
1. W h a t are the d i f f e r e n t phases of p o l i c y m a k i n g 4. As an education leader, h o w w o u l d you use Mr.
i m p l i e d i n this n e w s story? H o w do y o u know? Fuller?s s t u d y to i n f o r m y o u r analysis of the pol-
2. H o w are the d i f f e r e n t tasks of policy analysis re- i c y issue and w h a t w o r k e d ?
flected i n the story? 5. H o w w o u l d y o u r e s p o n d to Ms. McLane?s re-
3. H o w w o u l d y o u distinguish between the process marks regarding the study? W o u l d your response
o f p o l i c y m a k i n g and policy analysis using the in- differ i f y o u were p r i m a r i l y interested in policy
f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d i n this news story? making versus p o l i c y analysis? Explain.
Selected Websites
Economic Policy Institute. Available at promotes private alternatives to government regula-
tion and control. Their problem analysis stems from
http://www.epi.org/researchleducation/.
their belief that there is too much government regula-
T h i s is the education section of the official web-
tion. Education leaders may find this site helpful in
site of the Economic Policy Institute, a nonprofit
terms of viewing how conditions are identified and
W a s h i n g t o n , D.C., t h i n k tank. I t was created i n
solutions proffered when approached from this per-
1986 to broaden the discussion about economic
spective.
p o l i c y to i n c l u d e the interests of low- and middle-
i n c o m e workers. Their analysis of policy problems U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f Education. A v a i l a b l e at
is t h r o u g h a ? l i v i n g standards? lens, and they ana-
http://www.ed.gov.
l y z e the i m p a c t of policies and initiatives o n the
This is the official government website of the US.
A m e r i c a n public. The site contains leading research
o n education a n d other policy issues that may be o f Department of Education. It contains information
on educational issues important to all levels of
interest to policymakers. Education leaders should
education, including accreditation for higher edu-
compare and contrast the definition of policy prob-
cation institutions, student loans for higher educa-
lems a n d recommendations offered at this site w i t h
those o f the m o r e conservative research institution, tion students, pedagogical strategies for elemen?
N a t i o n a l Center for Policy Analysis. tary students, and so on. This site is useful becaut
it offers education leaders insight on the educah®
N a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r Policy Analysis. A v a i l a b l e at
conditions that the president and other leaders @
h t t p : / / w w w . n c p a . o r g / p u b l ?csEducation. the federal level find problematic. It is importan

T h i s is the education section o f the official website o f to know what these issues are and to be aware :
the National Center for Policy Analysis, w h i c h is a policy directions and the implications of poli cies
p u b l i cp o l i c y research organization that develops and being considered.
Chapter 2 ©
Department o f Education, Office o f of elementary and secondary education p r o g r a m s

a ae! e n t a s y a n d S e c o n d a r y E d u c a t i o n , A v a i l a b l e a t and issues. The office is responsible for directing, co-
ppiiwuw2edgoviaboutlofficesilis
k tloeselindex. ordinating, and recommending policy for p r o g r a m s
designed to assist state and local education agencies,
html. , ;
help ensure access to services, foster educational i m -
., is the official website of the Office of Elementary
provement at the state and local levels, and to p r o v i d e
Secondary Education (OESE). It contains useful
and y information to enhance your knowledge financial assistance to local educational agencies.
and timel
e n
s e l e c t e d References
Dunn, W . N . (2004). P u b l i c p o l i c y a n a l y s i s : A n would find its discussion of the policy-making pro-
i n t r o d u c t i o n ( 3 r d ed.). U p p e r S a d d l e R i v e r , N J : cess a useful complement to the step-by-step method
P r e n t i c eH a l l . of analyzing policy presented in this text.
This text provides an excellent o v e r v i e w o n the field Patton, C. V., & Sawicki, D . S. (1993). B a s i c m e t h o d s
of policy analysis. Education leaders m a y f i n d i t help- o f p o l i c y analysis a n d planning. E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s ,
ful for the theoretical f r a m e w o r k that i t provides. The NJ: Prentice H a l l .
book takes a m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y approach to analysis.
Patton and Sawicki p r o v i d e an excellent o v e r v i e w o n
Like other scholars i n the field, D u n n describes the the method o f policy analysis. Their approach m a y b e
importance of starting the process w i t h a clear defini- especially interesting to education leaders w h o have
tion of the problem. a background i n economics. Like other m e t h o d s texts
Fowler, F.C. (2009). P o l i c y s t u d i e s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l i n policy analysis, the authors indicate that the f i r s t
leaders: A n i n t r o d u c t i o n . ( 3 r d ed.). U p p e r S a d d l e step i n the process is the definition o f the problem.
River, NJ: P r e n t i c e H a l l .
| like the educational and practical focus of Fowler?s

(2009) text on policy making. Education leaders
Taking the First Step
Define t h e P r o b l e m
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
= Write a clear description of a negative condition
= Structure the negative condition to read like a policy problem
= Bound and clarify the scope of the policy problem identified
= Develop goals and objectives for solving the policy problem identified
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
Education leaders at all levels have been mulling over t h e condition o f schools. Your
state department o f education has called a conference for leading education and bus!-
ness interests. A t a working session, the conveners o f the conference break you into
small groups to discuss the condition o f education in y o u r state. They want a sonsé
o f the persistent problems that exist. You are appointed leader o f your group and s
to take notes. A heated argument ensues when s o m e m e m b e r s o f your group argue
that education remains ?a tide of mediocrity? awash with problems; others disagree 4
claim that the problems o f schools are a ?manufactured crisis? a n d have been over?
stated. You want to bring your own analysis o f the education problem to the table an
convince people to buy in.
What is the problem as you see it, and how do you get your colleagues and yon
constituency to see your point? Would you respond differently depending on yo
education context?
Chapter 3 * Taking the First Step 49
STRUCTURING THE P R O B L E M
Writing a Clear Description o f t h e Problem
The first step in defining a policy problem is being clear about what the problem is. As
noted by Fowler (2009), Bardach (2009), and Dunn (2004), not all negative conditions
rise to the level of a policy problem, and not all policy problems become policy issues
that analysts need to examine. Booth, Colomb, and Williams (1995) argue that a clear
description of a problem starts w i t h the identification of a particular situation and w i t h
details of its undesirable consequences. Dunn (2004) adds that policy problems are un-
realized needs or opportunities for improvement, and for analysts to structure policy
problems appropriately, they w i l l need to provide information about the nature, scope,
and severity of the problem. Nature refers to the status of the problem. Is it stable, wors-
ening, or getting better? Scope refers to those included in the problem definition. Are
you looking at the problem from a community perspective, a national level, or through
a global lens? The severity of the problem refers to the magnitude of the problem. Is it
affecting a lot of people? Is the problem havinga big effect on the community of inter-
est? Is the rate at which the problem is changing high, low, or steady? Thus, to capture
the essence of the condition, policy analysts w i l l go through several structuring phases
simply to define the problem.
DIFFERENT PHASES IN PROBLEM STRUCTURING. Dunn notes that there are differences
between simply trying to get a sense of the problem situation and structuring the prob-
lem in a w a y that is meaningful for policymakers and practitioners. He argues that
problem structuring is a ?continuously recurring phase of policy inquiry in which ana-
lysts search among competing problem formulations of different stakeholders? (Dunn,
2004, p. 72). In this way, sensing the problem is similar to the discussion on issue rheto-
ric provided b y Bardach (2009), where there is interest in defining a condition as bad
and the language surrounding that discourse comes from the ?ordinary language of
debate and discussion? (p. 4). It also coincides with the ?policy talk? described in Tyack
and Cuban (1995) and cited in Heck (2004). Policy talk refers to the general discourse
surrounding key elements of the policy problem.
In Dunn?s discussion, structuring the problem is not the same as problem solving
because the former requires complex, higher-order methods of dissecting a problematic
condition. He argues that this step is iterative and should precede lower-order methods
of problem solving, which he sees as a technical rather than analytical task. I consider
that the primary purpose of the policy analytical process is a search for an appropriate
solution and would not necessarily describe the problem-solving aspect of it as simply
technical. Notwithstanding, I agree with Dunn that if the problem is made overly sim-
Plistic, analysts may be using limited resources inappropriately and may actually be
Spending their time solving the ?wrong? problem.
Problematic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Policy P r o b l e m s
problems are, at their heart, ill-structured problems (Dunn, 2004). Ill-structured

P olicy
Problems are so-called because it is difficult to know where they begin and wheret h e y
end. The very nature of a democratic policy process accentuates the challenges of prob-
lem structuring because decision making in a democracy involves multiple decision
ts, u n k n o w n values, a n d u n l i m i t e d alternatives o r at least options w i t h uncertain
50 Chapter 3 ¢ Taking the First Step
Do you have a clear statement of a condition that exists and that you would like to change?
* Have you made sure that no solution is embedded in your description of that condition?
* Have you provided research evidence of that condition? You should not force the reader to rely on your out
instinct.
© Have you described fully the context in which the condition exists? (What is the nature and extent of the
problem? What are the concrete steps taken to address it (if any)? Is there discussion of past attempts to
solve the problem, people affected, and so on?) :
Will readers be clear about the condition you are describing, the problem you want to change, anq the
end goal you have in mind? Readers should not be confused about the path that you woulg liket o
explore.
If you answer no to any of these questions, you need to go back and rewrite the problem definition.
FIGURE 3.1 Guide t o Structuring a Problem S t a t e m e n t
outcomes. In structuring policy problems and seeking their resolution, analysts must
recognize their underlying complexity. That is, policy problems are a challenge to de
fine because they are interdependent, the process of defining them is subjective, the choice
o f definition can seem artificial, and the nature of these problems is ever changing.
PERSONAL VERSUS POLICY PROBLEMS. These attributes contrast w i t h the relative sim-
p l i c i t y of personal problems, w h i c h are often w e l l structured because there is only one
o r a f e w decision makers, a small set o f policy alternatives, and clearly ranked prefer-
ences regarding outcomes (Dunn, 2004). For example, if parents are concerned about
the well-being of their child, they w i l l have a clear idea of w h y t h e y are concerned:
A m y is n o t h a p p y at school; Johnny cannot read; M o z a r t w a s n o t allowed to take band.
Parents also have an i m p l i c i t understanding of the values u n d e r l y i n g their concern.
W i t h i n typical constraints, parents do n o t have to persuade others that their values re-
flect the appropriate definition of well-being. They can s i m p l y pursue those strategies
that a l l o w them to alleviate the negative condition f o r their child. Granted, this may
be o v e r s i m p l i f y i n g the private decision-making process because, even i n the raising
o f their o w n child, parents have to be m i n d f u l of the laws of the land, their resources,
the rights o f others, and so on. N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g , there is a l i m i t e d n u m b e r ofdecision
makers in the personal context to argue about w h a t good looks like. While everyone 5
connected to others, i t is presumed that personal decisions w i l l have an impact on the
i n d i v i d u a l and the family, not the broad collective as a w h o l e .
INTERDEPENDENCE OF PROBLEMS. The w o r l d can be a messy place, w i t h the symptoms

of a problem, its causes, and its essence all interconnected. For example, if we find the
c o n d i t i o n o f l o w student scores problematic, is that a s y m p t o m of p o v e r t y o r a cause °
it? A s w e try to structure the problem, should w e start w i t h conditions that affect pov
erty, o r should w e start w i t h the factors that affect achievement? W h a t should be ?
b o t t o m line in that instance, and h o w do w e k n o w where to begin in a chain of facto
that m a y all be less than ideal? wn
In m a n y ways, the interdependency o f policy p r o b l e m s is like thatwell-kne the
n u r s e r y r h y m e o f the o l d lady w h o s w a l l o w e d the f l y , a n d then the spider, an
Chapter 3 ¢ Taking the First Step 51
pird w i t h the refrain being, ?Who knows w h y she swallowed the f l y . . . .? As edu-
cation leaders, we may not always k n o w w h y schools are not ideal, but the role of
policy analysts is to identify those problems that can be fixed and should be fixed using
collective resources.
Where do problems begin and end? Children get up in the morning and they go to
school. Is it the responsibility of education leaders to ensure that they have had break-
fast, transportation to school and back home again, a nutritious lunch, and so on? In the
United States, our answer to that question has generally been in the affirmative, and there
are lunch programs and busing offered by most school districts. More controversial is the
question of providing for the mental health of children and whether it should be part of
schooling and reflective of an education problem. Proponents of providing health and
human services in schools often argue that if policymakers do not address the needs of
the whole child, they w i l l not be able to address the single metric of academic perfor-
mance. Opponents of health and social services i n schools argue that these services are
beyond the purview of schooling and siphon scarce resources from academic studies.
Others argue for partnerships among schools and health and human service agencies
to balance both sides of the argument. For example, i n 2008, Mississippi policymakers
required students to take a one-half unit of comprehensive health to be eligible for gradu-
ation. To accomplish this, the state of Mississippi authorized and empowered the state
board of health and the various county health departments to establish and provide for
health education programs in the public schools of that state. To fulfill that function, these
organizations could employ county health educators. Education leaders in that state used
that framework to ensure that all students could access the information and skills neces-
sary to make high-quality, age-appropriate health decisions. As another example, educa-
tion and other policy leaders i n Hawaii have adopted a partnership between schools and
health services under their Healthy Children Healthy Communities Model. This model
stresses the importance of using school-community partnerships to develop a systemic,
comprehensive, multifaceted approach to ensuring high outcomes for children.
Problem structuring is often a difficult process because you must determine where
the problem begins and where it ends. This is where your values and understanding of
the world will determine how you choose to define the problem. Existing research also
provides helpful guidance about how other people interested in improving the problem
chose to tackle it and what made them successful or not in resolving it. For instance, edu-
cation policies in the 1960s focused on addressing low student achievement among the
Poor by incorporating lunch programs in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
Lunch programs were seen as a way to address low student achievement by improving
the welfare of children. In that structuring of the problem, the focus was on equalizing
°pportunities for children, which in turn were supposed to increase overall scores. By the
1980s, policymakers tended to focus on the economic implications of low student achieve-
ment rather than tackle economic factors as the root cause of poor school performance (e.g.,
A Nation at Risk). Consequently, a strategy chosen by policymakers in improving schools
targeted improving scores because of its implications for the economy rather than focusing
on improving economic opportunities because of its impact on student achievement.
SUBJECTIVITY AND ARTIFICIALITY OF STRUCTURING POLICY PROBLEMS. The inter-

dependence of policy problems can be frustrating because, in the end, the structur-
Ng Of policy issues may seem subjective and artificial. The process is subjective, but
52 Chapter 3 © Taking the First Step
subjectivity does not mean that those who aremaking t h e decision should not be ;
formed and reflective. Education leaders have to decide on their m a i n goals i n makin
the w o r l d (or at least the school) a better place. While D u n n (2004) is right that pol 8
problems are probably best tackled simultaneously, t a k i n g on all, o r evenm a n y y
the ills of society m a y be an o v e r w h e l m i n g and d a u n t i n g endeavor. Doing go n o
lead to the case where ?the best is the enemy of the good? a n d n o t h i n g gets done (a a
Colander, 1991). M y advice to education leaders w o u l d be to determine what the Bol
of a particular framing of a policy problem w o u l d entail, and if t h a t goal is acceptable
then that should be the policy problem tackled. This approach is clearly subjectiveand
the delineation of problems m a y be artificial, b u t that is the nature of the policy ana.
lytical process.
DYNAMIC NATURE OF POLICY PROBLEMS. Even w h e n education leaders are comfor,

able that they have discovered the problem that they w o u l d like to solve, the nature of
that problem can change over time. Education leaders m u s t be f u l l y aware of the tan-
gible and changing consequences of the problem that they have identified. Thus, they
need to formulate arguments that make sense even i n ever-changing and messy con-
texts. By clearly formulating the problem, they are better able to articulate the rationale
for the courses of action they w o u l d like to take. Booth a n d his colleagues (1995) offer
six questions that education leaders m u s t be able to answer a n d thus provide clarity
and g r o u n d i n g for their description of a condition that they w o u l d like to change:
. W h a t is y o u r point?
. W h a t evidence do you have?
Why do you think the evidence supports your claim?
. H o w w o u l d you respond to rebuttals?
. A r e y o u entirely sure about your response to concerns?
. H o w strong is y o u r claim? (That is, w i l l it h o l d up i n different contexts?)
Y o u r responses to these questions essentially lay a strong f o u n d a t i o n for defining

a p o l i c y problem. Your responses include a clear statement regarding w h a t you want
readers to believe (claim), the reasons that you t h i n k that y o u r audience should believe
w h a t y o u claim, the general principles that underlie y o u r assertions, and the limitations
that you make on your conclusions (Booth et al., 1995, p p . 89-90).
Building on Your Condition Statement
I n s t r u c t u r i n g the condition to read like a policy problem, y o u need to provide a de-

scriptive statement grounded in data. Bardach (2009) indicates that a helpful strategy
i n creating a problem statement is to w r i t e i n terms of excesses a n d deficits. (1c a l l this
the Goldilocks syndrome: the chair is too small, the p o r r i d g e is too hot, or the bed is a
hard.) A s education leaders w e m a y find that achievement scores are too low, d o p o
rates are too high, or the achievement gap between s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n s is too big. At} .
v e r y essence then, the w r i t i n g of a policy problem statement requires explicit,descrip
tive analysis w i t h i m p l i c i t l y normative undertones.
ment. The
Y o u should be able to describe the essence of y o u r p r o b l e m i n one state
ent is not
presence of the w o r d too i n a statement ensures that the f r a m e r of the stateme
c o n t e n t w i t h the. extant condition. Because readers m a y n o t be clear w h y this la of
a ition
contentment exists, however, it is your responsibility to create a working definition

4. Too many third-graders are not reading at grade level.
2. Too few students are proficient in math.
3, Too many schools are not making annual yearly progress.

4, Too few first-generation college students persist in college.
1
g, Too many low-income students do not complete high school.
6. Too few students earn their bachelor's degree in 4 years,
FIGURE 3.2 Examples of Descriptive Problem Statements Consistent with the Policy Literature,
Especially Bardach (2009)
the problem statement. Using the educational examples from the previous paragraph,
part of defining the problem statement requires that education leaders provide evidence
of why student scores are too low, what data and arguments support their contention
that the dropout rates are too high, or what facts indicate that the gap i n achievement
between student groups is too big.
To do that, establishing absolute standards of what would solve the problem or
making unfavorable comparisons w i t h relevant peer groups is important. For example,
to use an absolute standard to justify seeing the condition of student scores as being
too low may entail reference to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 that all children
should be proficient, and i f less than 100% of children are proficient, then a problem ex-
ists. You can also simply provide analogous siatistics to an appropriate referent group
and say that the condition is problematic because it causes ?us? to be less ?good? than
?them.? For example, in the n o w well-known 1983 A Nation at Risk report, the authors
claim that the ?tide of mediocrity? that washed over the education system was a great
threat to the success of the United States on the global stage.
M A K I N G THE C O N D I T I O N A P R O B L E M
Part of transforming the condition into a policy problem is to describe the consequences
to society if the condition remains as is. You can do that by embedding ?so what? i n
your expanded condition statement. Let's say that readers agreed that student perfor-
mance is too low, but so what? Why should they care about that particular condition?
Part of why readers and a broader audience w i l l care is knowing something about the
background of the condition. (1) W h o is affected? (2) H o w many people are affected?
(3) How are they affected? (4) Is the broader society affected? (5) How is it affected?
economically; politically; morally? (6) Is the impact big or small? While we are answer-
ing these six questions, our discussion must always be clear that the w o r l d does not
have to be the w a y it is and that we can do something about the condition being de-
fined as problematic. Recall the discussion in the previous chapters where a condition
does not transform into a policy problem unless there is an understanding that it can
be solved and should be solved using government resources. Your responses to the six
questions also tie into the reasons you think that the problem exists. We are ready for a
More in-depth discussion on bounding the scope of the problem and an examination of
the causal factors therein.
34 C h a p t e3r Taking the First Step
- Who is affected?
. How many people are affected?
. In what ways are people affected?

. ls the broader society affected?
. In what ways is the broader society affected (economically, politically, morally)?
. Is the impact big or small?
FIGURE 3.3 S u m m a r y o f Questions T h a t M u s t Be A n s w e r e d t o A d d r e s s Consequences o f Not

S o l v i n g a Problem
SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM
Bounding the Problem
By s t r u c t u r i n g the problem i n a particular w a y , y o u are leaving some things out and

i n c l u d i n g others. It is i m p o r t a n t to make clear f r o m the first step o f the policy analysis
process that at the end of the journey, actions generated f r o m the process w i l l not cre.
ate a perfect w o r l d b u t w i l l create a better one. A s an e d u c a t i o n leader, you have to
make choices about h o w to delineate the p r o b l e m and w h e r e i n the complex chain of
cause and consequence you p l a n to start. Y o u r choice w i l l influence the consideration of
certain phenomena as causes, consequences, o r evidence of the p r o b l e m at hand. Your
choice m a y also influence whether actors consider themselves to be winners or losers
u n d e r the change you propose.
WHO IS INCLUDED?A key aspect of b o u n d i n g the scope of the p r o b l e m is not only

k n o w i n g where to start i n the chain of factors b u t also k n o w i n g w h o the stakeholders
are. Stakeholders comprise those i n d i v i d u a l s o r g r o u p s w h o are affected b y and who
influence the choice of action taken to resolve the p o l i c y issue i d e n t i f i e d . Your discus-
s i o n a b o u t the consequences of the p r o b l e m w i l l p r o v i d e i n s i g h t about the impact
o f policies chosen to address the p r o b l e m a n d the g r o u p s affected b y those policies.
R e v i e w i n g the literature on policy m a k i n g can reveal h o w y o u can prioritize among
those actors. For example, M a r s h a l l a n d colleagues (1989), as cited i n Heck (2004),
offer a categorization of influence w h e r e actors m a y be g r o u p e d into five key catego
ries: insiders, near circle participants, f a r circle participants, sometimes players, and
f o r g o t t e n players. Insiders include political actors w h o set the agenda and are instru:
m e n t a l i n m o v i n g p o l i c y forward. T h i s g r o u p o f stakeholders includes the leaders of
countries, their top appointments, and other leaders of p o l i c y - m a k i n g communities.
I n democracies, they t y p i c a l l y consist of elected o f f i c i a l s a n d are analogous to the
v i s i b l e participants described b y K i n g d o n (1995), N e a r circle p a r t i c i p a n t s are those
i n d i v i d u a l s o r g r o u p s w h o can play an i n f l u e n t i a l role on the p o l i t i c a l decisions made
b y insiders. This g r o u p t y p i c a l l y consists o f l e g i s l a t i v e and executive staff members,
w h o serve the official leaders. Far circle p a r t i c i p a n t s m a y n o t be influential in te
f o r m a t i o n and a d o p t i o n of p o l i c y b u t m a y p l a y an i m p o r t a n t role i n itsi m p l e m e n a

tion. This g r o u p often includes teachers, d i s t r i c t a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , c o m m u n i t yliaison?
a n d so on. Those p o l i c y actors c o n s i d e r e d to be s o m e t i m e s p l a y e r s do n o t have
Chapter 3 © T a k i n g the First Step 55
consistent role to play in the policy-making process ,

although their level of participa-
tion and influence may vary w i t h the issue. This group may include grassroots orga-
nizers, community representatives, and so on. Groups on the margin are forgotten
playerswhose influence on the governmental agenda (and thus policies generated) is
sporadic. Quite often, forgotten players belong to groups that are marginalized due
to ethnicity, poverty, culture, and so on. As Spring (2005) and others have noted else-
where, quite often those groups and individuals who have the most influence on the
olicy decisions being made are not the ones who w i l l be affected the most directly by
implementation of the policy.
Bardach (2009) g r o u p s s t a k e h o l d e r s i n the p o l i c y process d i f f e r e n t l y a n d de-
scribes s t a k e h o l d e r s i n general as ?interests.? For any p o l i c y action examined, there
are i n d i v i d u a l s a n d / o r g r o u p s w h o s u p p o r t t h a t action, oppose i t , or are i n d i f f e r -
ent. Therefore, t o o p t i m i z e t h e p o l i t i c a l f e a s i b i l i t y of certain p o l i c y options, Bardach
asserts t h a t one s h o u l d f o r m u l a t e t h e m so t h a t s u p p o r t e r s are c o n v e r t e d i n t o al-
lies and o p p o s i t i o n is n e u t r a l i z e d o r negated. H o w e v e r y o u choose to i d e n t i f y a n d
group stakeholders, an analysis of them i n the p o l i c y analytical process lays i m p o r -
tant g r o u n d w o r k f o r assessing t h e p o l i t i c a l f e a s i b i l i t y o f v a r i o u s actions l a t e r o n .
K n o w i n g m o r e a b o u t t h e u n d e r l y i n g c o n d i t i o n s affecting t h e existence of the p r o b -
lem w i l l p r o v i d e essential i n s i g h t on w h o is affected as w e l l as p o t e n t i a l w a y s of
resolving it.
Causes o f t h e P r o b l e m
The reason we think a particular condition exists is tied to our values, worldviews, phi-
losophy, priorities, disciplines, education, experience, and so on. Heck (2004) argues
that we can examine policy through three main lenses. As noted in previouschapters,
these three lens are largely from a rational framework, where we emphasize goals;
a cultural framework, where the emphasis is on relationships; and an institutional
framework, where structural factors are the focus. These disciplinary groupings are
not exhaustive, but they are helpful in allowing us to organize the literature regard-
ing a problem of interest, Let us revisit the example problem statement that we had
in Chapter 2 where too many students i n higher education do not earn a bachelor?s
degree in 4 years, From that statement, we can create a Venn diagram of the possible
causes of the problem cited in the literature (see Figure 3.5), A l l three disciplinary per-
spectives overlap, but each perspective w i l l likely delineate the problem differently,
and thus education leaders relying on different perspectives may offer different ap-
Proaches to solving the problem identified.
Causes Problem Consequences

What are the factors W h a t is the explicit So what? W h a t are the
that the literature description o f the negative implications of
indicates a r e underlying condition t h a t one finds leaving the defined
reasons for the problematic? What condition as it le? How
Problematic condition? evidence supports this Is the world worse off
existence? by having this condition?
FIGURE 3.4 Structuring a Problem Statement by Deconstructing the Problematic Condition

56 Chapter 3 © T a k i n g the First Step
I n s u f f i c i e n t incentives exist :
1
for students to finish on time. |":
Rational
Too many students

a higher education
jo not e a m a Bacha|
Institutional d e g r e e in foury e a r so r s
Geo
e p s
4
insufficient organizational Insufficient bonds are

structures exist to allow formed b e t w e e n students
students to finish within 4 and c a m p u s community
years; @.g., classes
are filled
FIGURE 3 . 5 E x a m p l e o f D i f f e r e n t Disciplinary Perspectives on t h e Possible Cause o f a Policy Problem
RATIONAL PERSPECTIVE. Education leaders using a rational perspective may exam-

ine and conclude that students in higher education are not completing their bachelor?s
degree in 4 years because they have insufficient incentives to do so (e.g., Ehrenberg &
Mavros, 1995; Gillingham, Seneca, & Taussig, 1991). If education leaders subscribe to
that viewpoint, they may argue that there should be incentives built into the system that
would allow students to change the benefit and cost structure currently being applied by
students. This approach may include economic arguments to develop policies that force
or facilitate the private costs and benefits to the individual student to be more reflective
of the social costs and benefits to the university and the society at large. This may entail
providing a discount on tuition to students who complete their education within 4 years
and sharply increasing the costs of attending school if more than 4 years are taken to
complete their studies. A t the secondary level of education, i f the problem is perceived
as student performance being too low, one strategy would be to provide students with
an incentive to achieve better grades by paying them for their academic performance or
attendance. For example, education leaders in Chicago, Illinois, rewarded students with
perfect attendance with trips to the circus. Leaders at a Massachusetts high school offered
a cash incentive program to students to increase attendance (e.g., Wallace & McDermott
2010). The success of these programs has been varied, and Harvard researchers have
found that providing incentives for education inputs like attendance was generally mor
successful than providing incentives for education outputs, like test scores (Fryer, 2010)
Certainly, there are noneconomic arguments to be made for and against particular poli
cies. A t this point, you may be thinking of the equity and moral implications of the strat
egies proposed, and these are important for education leaders to consider.
INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE. Education leaders using a structural or institutional pe!

spective may formulate the lengthy completion of the bachelor?s degree as a probler
caused by institutional barriers. From this standpoint, education leaders may consider fat
tors such asunavailabilityo f classes, inappropriate planning of student schedules, and so

on. Given the factors identified, education leaders w i l l look for alternatives that address
these structuralc hallenges. Their favored strategies may include increasing class size (thus
making more space available), improving advice offered by faculty advisers (e.g., Ferrer
del Valero, 2001), and reviewing college admission decisions (e.g., Wang & Pilarzyk, 2007).
Anexample of a structural approach to improving education contexts is the use or aban-
donment of tracking to promote improved performance and/or equity. For example, edu-
cation leaders at an economically, ethnically, and culturally diverse secondary school in
California eliminated ability grouping at the school level in order to balance the dual goals
of excellence and equity (e.g., Cooper, 1996). By contrast, Gordon Brown, prime minister of
Great Britain from June 2007 to May 2010, sought to have ability groupings in key subjects
as the norm in schools (e.g., Grouping kids by ability harms education, 2007).
CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE. The same p r o b l e m (insufficient n u m b e r s of students complet-

ing a bachelor?s degree i n 4 years) m a y be delineated q u i t e d i f f e r e n t l y b y e d u c a t i o n
-Jeaders r e l y i n g on a c u l t u r a l perspective. The emphasis offered b y e d u c a t i o n leaders
relying on a c u l t u r a l perspective is the influence o f relationships on the p h e n o m e n o n .
That is, t h e y w o u l d l i k e l y r e g a r d the p r o b l e m as being caused b y creating insufficient
ties between students and the b r o a d e r college c o m m u n i t y , b o t h inside and outside the
classroom (e.g., Thomas, 2000; Tinto, 1997). For education leaders d r a w n to this p e r -
spective, resolution of a p r o b l e m m u s t be anchored i n the development a n d b u i l d i n g
of relationships. Consequently, one strategy that m a y be offered to increase the t i m e l y
completion of the first degree m a y be to i m p r o v e the classroom experience of students
b y p r o m o t i n ga collaborative learning experience as w e l l as the a d o p t i o n of collabora-
tive learning strategies, as was done b y the Seattle Central C o m m u n i t y College. O u t s i d e
the classroom, the creation of Welcome Week at the U n i v e r s i t y of M i n n e s o t a was an
explicit e f f o r t on the p a r t o f u n i v e r s i t y administrators to increase the t i m e f r e s h m e n
w o u l d be on campus before the official start o f classes and to start early w i t h the b u i l d -
ing of bonds between the university and the students.
In the education arena, the creation or strengthening of cultural bonds between stu-
dents and the broader campus community is not unique to higher education; examples
also abound in elementary (primary) and secondary schools. For example, the creation of
schools within a school is an attempt on the part of policymakers and administrators to cre-
ate greater school cohesion and connectedness. This approach is justified in part because of
its perceived positive effect on student performance (e.g., Maroulis & Gomez, 2008).
Policymakers and analysts can rely on m u l t i p l e lenses and perspectives to i d e n t i f y
what they consider to be the heart o f the p r o b l e m and w h a t needs to be done to resolve
it. For example, the U n i t e d States Department of Education indicates that the N o C h i l d
Left Behind A c t of 2001 ( w h i c h was subsequently reauthorized i n 2007) contains f o u r
pillars: (1) stronger accountability f o r results, (2) m o r e freedom for states and c o m m u n i -
ties, (3) p r o v e n education methods, and (4) m o r e choices for parents (U.S. D e p a r t m e n t
of Education, P o w e r P o i n t presentation a v a i l a b l e at h t t p : / / w w w 2 . e d . g o v / n c l b /
o v e r v i e w / i n t r o / p r e s e n t a t i o n / i n d e x . h t m l ) . These f o u r pillars are i n d i c a t i v e of w h a t
policymakers have i d e n t i f i e d as the u n d e r l y i n g causes o f inadequate performance o f
students and a m o n g s t u d e n t groups. That is, if the p o l i c y calls for stronger accountabil-
ity for results, the i m p l i c a t i o n is that a lack of accountability was a key factor i n the lack
o f Proficiency a m o n g students a n d the perceived underperformance of the education
58 Chapter 3 © Taking the First Step
community. The same analysis may be made for the remaining three pillars,
to the Top Fund, which is part of the American Recovery andR e i n v e s t m e n t Act of 2 si
(ARRA), Section 14005-6, Title XIV, (Public Law 111-5), provides competitive e r
to encourage and reward states that are creating the conditions for educationi n n o
tion and reform. These grants presume that one reason students are not doing we ve
because of insufficient incentives in the system to support educational innoy 8
a t i o na n d
reform. While an understanding of the underlying factors of a policy problem 1s i m Or.
tant i n the creation of appropriate solutions, k n o w i n gw h e r e y o u w a n t to go is Crucial to
resolving the issue. In essence, defining the problem is incomplete w i t h o u t aN explicit
statement of the goal of the analysis.
G O A L S A N D OBJECTIVES OF SOLVING THE P R O B L E M IDENTIFIED
T h e G o a l is t h e O b v e r s e o f t h e P r o b l e m
The goal of the analysis is to find an alternative that results i n the obverse of the prob-
lem identified. Thus, if the problematic condition statement reads, ?Too few students
are p e r f o r m i n g proficiently,? then the goal w o u l d be to have m o r e students perform.
i n g proficiently. Patton and Sawicki (1993) note that goals are ?formally and broadly
w o r d e d statements about what we desire to achieve in the l o n g run? (p. 187). For in-
stance, the goal of N o C h i l d Left Behind (NCLB) is to have 100% proficiency among
the nation?s children. A n explicit statement of the goal o r goals also acts as a check on
w h e t h e r the problem that you have identified really is the one on w h i c h you would
like to focus your efforts and limited resources. I f the goal identified is not where you
u l t i m a t e l y w o u l d like to be, that is a red flag and you w i l l have to revisit and redefine
y o u r problem statement.
Objectives are W o r k i n g Definitions o f G o a l s
P r o v i d i n g a general description of h o w the w o r l d should l o o k after resolution of the

p r o b l e m identified is a necessary b u t not sufficient step i n p o l i c y analysis. Equally im-
p o r t a n t is p r o v i d i n g a w o r k i n g definition of what it means to reach that goal. This spec-
ification is often characterized as objectives, indicators, o r benchmarks (e.g., Patton &
Sawicki, 1993; Garner, 2004). This specification must be focused on a specific end state,
w i t h concrete measures of h o w you w i l l k n o w w h e n that goal has been achieved.
The goal Is to have:
. More third-graders who read at grade level,

. More students who are proficient in math.
. More schools who make annual yearly progress.
. More first-generation college students who persist in college.

. More low-income students who complete high school,
. More students who earn their bachelor?s degree in 4 years.
FIGURE 3.6 Examples of Goal Statements (Obverse of Statements in Figure 3.2)

Chapter 3 ©
Taking the First Step 59
|
mples of Education, Policy Problem with Associated Goals and Objectives

Goals
problems Objectives
Too many third-graders are not More third-graders who read at The percentage of third-graders who
reading at grade level. grade level. read at grade level, as measured by
[test], will increase from 35% to 50%
by 2014.
Too few students are proficient More students w h o are proficient The percentage of students in [specify
in math. in math. system] who are proficient in math, as
measured by [test] will increase f r o m
5 0 % to 75%.
Too many schools are not making More schools that make annual The number of schools t h a t are
annual yearly progress. yearly progress. making annual yearly progress as
measured by the requirements of
the NCLB will increase from [specify
number] to [specify bigger number]
by 2012.
Too few first-generation college More first-generation college The percentage (or number) o f
students persist in college. students w h o persist in college. first-generation college students
who remain enrolled in college will
increase from [specify number] t o
[specify bigger number} by 2015.
Too many low-income students More low-income students w h o The percentage o f low-income
do not complete high school. complete high school. students w h o complete high school
will increase f r o m the present rate o f
[specify percentage] to [specify bigger
percentage] by 2014.
Too few students earn their More students w h o earn their The number o f undergraduate
bachelor?s degree in 4 years. bachelor?s degree in 4 years students w h o earn a bachelor's
degree in 4 years will increase f r o m
its present level of 3 5 % to 8 5 % by
2015.
a
Source: Compiled by the a u t h o r as an illustrative g u i d e to distinguishing among problem, goals, a n d objectives.
OBJECTIVES VERSUS ALTERNATIVES. A t t h i s p o i n t o f the discussion, s t u d e n t s o f t e n

question the difference b e t w e e n objectives a n d alternatives. A n objectives m a y be
considered a ?what?: w h a t w i l l l e t us k n o w t h a t w e have achieved the goal. These
May include o u t p u t data o n g r a d u a t i o n rates f o r specific p o p u l a t i o n s , pass rates
o f student groups, a n d so on. A n a l t e r n a t i v e is a ?how?: t h a t is, the strategies t h a t
will be p r o m o t e d to ensure t h a t objectives are met. For example, i f w e w a n t e d to
get to Duluth, M i n n e s o t a , f r o m M i n n e a p o l i s , the g o a l w o u l d be D u l u t h . The objec-
tives would be the signposts o r m a r k e r s t h a t a l l o w us to k n o w w h a t p o i n t s w e h a v e
Teached on our trip. A l t e r n a t i v e s w o u l d be the means b y w h i c h w e achieve the goal:
We could drive, w a l k , take t h e bus, o r f l y . T o use an e x a m p l e m o r e d i r e c t l y r e l e v a n t
t o education, i f the g o a l is to h a v e b e t t e r e d u c a t e d s t u d e n t s , w e need a concrete
measure of w h a t ?better educated? is. U n d e r the g u i d e l i n e s r e q u i r e d b y the f e d e r a l
60 Chapter3 © T a k i n g the First Step
g o v e r n m e n t , ?better educated? is measured b y pass rates on statewide | ests os
i n the t h i r d t h r o u g h eighth grade. Those pass rates thus serve as the objective
sociated w i t h the goals of the policy. &S ag.
Chapter Summary
A comprehensive statement of a policy problem _ the narrative, you w o u l d f i n d that sent
has three components: (1) a descriptive state- s u p p o r t i n g the existence of thecondition y r
ment of the c o n d i t i o n w i t h accompanying evi- _ part of the opening paragraphs.Sentences i
dence; (2) a discussion of the consequences o f n o t _ scribing the factors resulting i n the problemat,
solving the condition, also w i t h accompanying condition and the consequences of not solvinte
evidence; and (3) a discussion, grounded i n the w o u l d f o l l o w , a n d t h e y w o u l d be gtouped e
literature, of the factors that led to the existence cording to their categorization as a causalfacto
of the problem. A t the heart of the problem state- or as a consequence o f the condition. By Organiz.
ment is a description of the condition and data _ ing the p r o b l e m statement this way, the reader
organized into meaningful evidence to support _can f o l l o w the logic o f the education l e a dinehis
r
the description. By organizing the discussion ac- _ or her definition of a policy problem.
cording to these three components, an education You have now tackled one of the most
leader can go a long way in providing a clear challenging steps in policy analysis. I t is time to
definition of the problem. If you read through = Move on to making your case.
Review Questions
1. What do you think are some of the challenges 4, Given your description of the problem in
i n d e v e l o p i n g a clear problem definition? Review Question 2, indicate the goals and
H o w w o u l d you address these challenges? likely objectives of solving it.
2. Write a clear description of a problem that 5. A t the beginning of the chapter, you were in-
you would like to tackle in your role as edu- troduced to different definitions of an educa-
cation leader. tion problem facing the United States. How
3. H o w does y o u r description of the problem w o u l d you define the problem? Would your
make it clear that this is a p o l i c y p r o b l e m definition be consistent or inconsistent with
and n o t a personal one? H o w well d i d y o u the definition offered b y policymakers at var-
address the nature, scope, and severity of ious levels of government (including federal,
the problem? state, district, and school)?
i 7? a
N e w s S t o r y f o r A n a l y s i s
e d labor.A s
?Faulty federal math hurts reserve schools,? National going f o r w a r d is a shortage of skill ds are
Post ( £ / k / a The Financial Post) (Canada). October 30, t h e global financial crisis bites, andthousan at
2008 Thursday. National Edition. BYLINE: John t h r o w n o u t o f w o r k , he m i g h t be reassessing

I v i s o n , National Post. SECTION: C A N A D A ; John statement. snmediate
Ivison; Pg. A4. DATELINE: OTTAWA But while it may not be his most imm' many |
OTTAWA?Prime Minister Stephen Harper headache, there?s no doubt that the effect of s0 vitth
s a i d d u r i n g t h e e l e c. t i o n c a m p a i g n t h a t t h e m o s t Baby Boomers retiring, coupled w i t h a l v
the
serious problem this country [Canada] w i l l face rate, is going to be an economic e@ q -
3
Chapter ¢ Taking the First Step 61
tremors of which were already being felt before the provincial levels. In 1996, the federal government
current crisis hit. The Bank of Canada released a sur- instituted a 2% cap on funding increases that, over
v e y recently, in which 40% of firms said labor short- time, has meant a 7% drop in real dollars, after ad-
ages were restricting their ability to meet demand. justments for inflation and population growth.
This should be good news for Canada?s As the National Post revealed i n A p r i l , spend-
First Nations. Their people are y o u n g ? t h e me- i n g by the D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d i a n a n d N o r t h e r n
dian age on reserves is 22, compared to 36 for all Affairs Canada ( I N A C ) on the average native stu-
Canadians?and they have burgeoning population dent was $6,916 i n 2006-07, compared w i t h a p r o v i n -
"
srowth, with a rate three times the rest of Canada.
cial average of $8,165 ( I N A C had never released that
Yet, a b o r i g i n a l C a n a d i a n s are u n l i k e l y to n u m b e r before, saying comparisons are ? d i f f i c u l t ? ?
be the s o u r c e o f s o l u t i o n s t o t h e p r o b l e m i n y e a r s no wonder).
to c o m e , u n l e s s t h e r e a r e s o m e d r a s t i c c h a n g e s t o The inevitable result is that teachers get paid
p u b l i c policy, a c c o r d i n g to a n e w s t u d y f o r the C D less on reserves, there are more students per teacher
Howe Institute b y S i m o n Fraser U n i v e r s i t y profes- and there are fewer resources. When combined w i t h
s o r JohnR i c h a r d s , the haphazard governance regimes, the grim gradu-
By looking at 2006 census data, Professor ation statistics should come as no surprise. There
Richards discovered only two-thirds of aboriginal have been attempts made to arrest this decline, par-
Canadians between the ages of 25 and 44 havea ticularly in New Brunswick and British Columbia,
_
high school diploma, compared w i t h nine o u t o f 10 where a tripartite agreement between Ottawa, ©
non-native Canadians. the provincial government and aboriginal groups

The global f i g u r e m a s k s s o m e even m o r e has produced a First Nations Education Steering
worrying statistics?less than 40% o f First Nations Committee to run the reserve school system.
adults w h o live o n reserves g r a d u a t e d f r o m h i g h This is an approach advocated b y M i c h a e l
school, a gap of 50% w i t h the rest o f Canada. In Mendelson, senior scholar at the C a l e d o n Institute,
Manitoba, only one i n four males aged 20 to 24 o n w h o has noted that non-native r u r a l schools were
reserves is l i k e l y to have finished h i g h school. consolidated i n t o larger b o a r d s m a n y years ago, .
This matters because the employment rate ?sometimes over the strenuous objection o f local _
nearly doubles for those w i t h a high school di- committees.? .

ploma and continues to rise as you move up the Even though the B.C. initiative shows promise,'
education ladder. Only one in three aboriginal there has been little real progress because it diverts
Canadians who did not graduate from high school funding from participating bands to the new aborig-
had a job in 2006, according to the census, inal-run school authority. Local band councils, more ?
Since there are currently 75,000 kids i n anxious about preserving their autonomy and fund- *
schools on reserves, the findings suggest we are ing than the graduation rates of their young people, :
storing up trouble, as a small army of poor, unem- are resisting reform, according to the Richards report. ?
ployed natives looks for outlets for its discontent, The way to break this logjam would seem |
instead of contributing to increasing the nation?s to be the promise of increased reserve education .
store of wealth.
funding to provincial levels, if bands participate? '
So, what to do? Outcomes for Indians living essentially making them an offer they can?t refuse.
off-reserve and for Metis were much better (60% James Wilson, director of education at the
and 75% graduation rates, respectively) but, short Opaskwayak Education Authority in Manitoba,
of cutting off federal funding for the reserve system thinks this strategy would work. ?My father, who?s
(an option with which many readers may feel sym- now retired, sald that we fought so hard and for |
pathy, but which is politically toxic), the answer has so many years to control education locally that
to lie in improving the quality of reserve schools. it?s now hard to let go. But we have to bew i l l i n g
The problem here is that many of them are to look at why we did it in the first place and ask ;
tun by local bands that have neither the resources whether we should give up control, if it is for the |
Nor expertise to develop a curriculum, assess stu- benefit of our students,? he said.
dents and teachers, or manage facilities. They are The federal g o v e r n m e n t has said it w i l l in-
er hindered by funding that does not match crease native education f u n d i n g b y $268 m i l l i o n :
. : wal
62 3
Chapter © Taking the First Step
over five y e a r s ? a move M r . Wilson says is a step For a government that hasPitch
i n the r i g h t direction, b u t one that is u n l i k e l y to of self-governing, self-sufficient Fins aVision?
bridge the gap between w h a t on-reserve and pro- communities, funded by their own s t ions:
creased aboriginal education fundin aX base, ine:
vincial schools spend (the increase w o r k s out at
a r o u n d $700 p e r head, w h i l e the f u n d i n g gap in considered an essential investmen Lev8 shoulg be
such p r o v i n c e s as Alberta, Saskatchewan and when the specter of deficit looms so large atime -
Manitoba is close to $3,000).

M a t e r i a l r e p r i n t e d w i t h t h e e x p r e s s p e r m i s s i o n of: ? N a t i o n a l P o s t Inc.?.
1, W h a t are the d i f f e r e n t definitions of the policy 4. Indicate the d o m i n a n t disciplinary lenses
problem inferred in the article? w h i c h the various stakeholders seet h e
Problem
2. W h a t a r e t h e c a u s e s o f t h e p r o b l e m that are o f education. In w h a t ways does the
Narrative
i m p l i e d by these different definitions? used in this article reflect these lenses?
3. For each d e f i n i t i o n i d e n t i f i e d , describe the 5. With which definition of the Polic
i m p l i c a t i o n s for policy and the potential impact would you agree? Explain. Prtln
o n stakeholders.
_? -- o a e e e
Selected Websites
Mississippi Department of Education. Office of http://smhp.psych.ucla.edulgflCommout_tt/

Healthy Schools. Available at School-Com2-8.pdf
http:lwww.healthyschoolsms.orglohs_mainl This website presents an excerpt from a PDF doc.
resources/state_policies.htm u m e n t p u b l i s h e d j o i n t l y b y the U.S. Department
The official website of the Office of Healthy Schools of of H e a l t h and H u m a n Services and the Center for
the Mississippi Department of Education. The office M e n t a l H e a l t h Services. Education leaders may
bills itself as having an understanding of the impact of find this site h e l p f u l because i t documents various
the health o f children and adolescents on Mississippi s c h o o l - c o m m u n i t y p a r t n e r s h i p s across the United
and America?s future. The Mississippi Department States. These partnerships reflect a variety of
o f Education (MDE) restructured and consolidated ways i n w h i c h education leaders and others have
its health and safety-related programs under the d e f i n e d the goals o f education and the problem of
umbrella of the Office of Healthy Schools, which is a schooling.
product of the state?s Department of Education and
The Bower Foundation. Through the efforts of the U.S, Department of Education. PowerPoint presenta-
Office of Healthy Schools, the Mississippi Department tion of the N o Child Left Behind A c t of 2001.
of Education offers a system of coordinated school http://www2.ed.gou/nclbloverviewlintrol
health services to 152 school districts to assist them presentation/index.html
in developing organizations that make the connec- This site offers a reader-friendly version of the 600+
tion between good student health and high academic page document o f the N o Child Left Behind Act
achievement. Education leaders may find this site o f 2001. This website may be useful for education
helpful because it presents one example of how state leaders because it highlights aspects of the report _
policymakers tried to address the needs o f children by that current policy leaders emphasize in theirdefini
using multiple partnerships. tion o f the problem. This site also allows education
U.S. Department o f Health and H u m a n Services and leaders to focus o n the framing of problems froma
Center for Mental Health Services. School-Community rational perspective and the resultant goals that
Partnerships: A Guide. Available at are established.
Chapter 3 * Taking the FirstStep 63
Selected References
M a r o u l i s , 5., & G o m e z , L. M . ( 2 0 0 8 , S e p t e m b e r ) . T h o m a s , S. L. (2000, S e p t e m b e r / O c t o b e r ) . Ties t h a t

Does ? c o n n e c t e d n e s s ? m a t t e r ? E v i d e n c e f r o m a so- b i n d . J o u r n a l o f H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n , 71(5), 591-615.
cial n e t w o r k a n a l y s i s w i t h i n a s m a l l - s c h o o l r e f o r m
This study offers yet another example of an educa-
{part o f a s p e c i a l i s s u e e n t i t l e d S m a l l S e c o n d a r y
tion problem defined froma cultural perspective,
Schools]. Teachers C o l l e g e R e c o r d , 110(9), 1 9 0 1 - 1 9 2 9 ,
this time for students at a 4-year liberal arts college.
This article examines h o w s c h o o l - w i t h i n - a - s c h o o l Thomas examined college student integration and
reform p r o v i d e d o p p o r t u n i t i e s for h i g h school stu- persistence, and highlighted the differential effects
dents i n a large secondary school to b u i l d stronger of various network characteristics on persistence.
relationships w i t h their peers. E d u c a t i o n leaders Education leaders may find this article of interest
may find this article h e l p f u l i n v i e w i n g the d e f i n i t i o n because it shows how relationships can influence
of student a c h i e v e m e n t f r o m a c u l t u r a l perspective. student integration and persistence within the
It also details the i m p a c t o f s c h o o l - w i t h i n - a - s c h o o l higher education system.
reform o n s t u d e n t p e r f o r m a n c e a n d the i m p o r t a n c e
Wang, Y., & Pilarzyk, T. (2007, Fall). M a p p i n g the
of context o n this impact.
enrollment process: Implications of setting dead-
Orfield, G. (2000). Policy and equity: Lessons of lines for student success and college management.
a third of a century of education reforms in the
Journal of College Admission, 197, 24-33.
United States. In F Reimers (Ed.), Unequal schools,
This article looks at the problem of education
unequal chances: The challenges to equal oppor-
throughas t r u c t u r a l lens. Wang and colleagues
tunity in the Americas. Harvard University Press:
argue that management decisions should be in-
Cambridge, M A .
formed by detailed enrollment data, especially on
Orfield describes the major themes of two different how the timing of student decisions affects their
policy eras in U.S, educational policy since the 1960s. academic success. The authors look at the enrollment
He characterizes the decades from 1960 to 1980 as a flow at a large, urban, community-based techni-
time that emphasized equity, while the decades after cal college to recommend and monitor enrollment
1980 have had a strong emphasis on competition and decisions. They tried to find the optimal balance
standards. He argues that the definitions offered i n among honoring the college mission, easing admis-
the earlier era resulted in policymakers achieving sion processing, providing retention efforts, and
more success in narrowing educational gaps and maximizing fiscal support. Education leaders may
increasing educational attainment levels. Education find this article of interest because of its institutional
leaders may find this chapter interesting because of perspective and the insight on problem definition
the historical framing it offers on the different prob- and goals when viewed with institutional incentives
lem definitions that have prevailed. in mind.
Make the Case by
Assembling the Evidence
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES ~

= Describe the purpose of assembling evidence
« Identify the evidence needed based on the purpose of analysis
= Determine the value of specific data
= Locate relevant sources
= Categorize types of data
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
You have b e e n r e c e n t l y elected to the s c h o o l b o a r d . You a r e a n x i o u s to m a k e changes to

the strategies previously a d o p t e d b y the leaders o f the c o m m u n i t y b e c a u s e y o u think that
t h e y w e r e wrong. You have a g u t feeling that if t e a c h e r c o n t r a c t s w e r e revised to include
m o r e time for p r o f e s s i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d m o r e i n c e n t i v e s for s t u d e n t achievement,
p r o d u c t i v i t y w o u l d g o u p in the s c h o o l district. You a r e s u r p r i s e d w h e n y o u attend the first
w o r k i n g m e e t i n g o f the n e w b o a r d a n d m a n y o f y o u r c o l l e a g u e s s t r o n g l y disagree with
y o u . They a r g u e that f o c u s i n g o n t o u g h e r c u r r i c u l u m s t a n d a r d s a n d investing in intema-
t i o n a l b a c c a l a u r e a t e p r o g r a m s a t the early levels are the s o l u t i o n s to take. After 2 hours of
arguing, the m e e t i n g closes with n o resolution. The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t is c h a r g e d with obtain-
i n g information o n the validity o f e a c h a p p r o a c h .
What data do you think will be persuasive? Which data would you direct her to collect?
functio
persuasive
proof.
of P
ns
Research
into
Data
Evidence
Transforming
in
to
how
and
math
science.
scores
middling
address
OF
apose
THE
ASSEMBLING
EVIDENCE
for
pay
onand
initiating
based
compensation
performance.
in
the
2008
Congress
and
2009.
U.S.
both ?
to to
for
on
Japan
U.S.
Manyhaveto to
students.
insights
their
among
Cteativity
leaders the
foster
which
looked policies
could
looked
ersJapanese
United
have
States
education
determine their
others
Many
how
similar may
addressed
nation
problems.
see
policymak-
ple,past
the
and
globe
their
look
around
leaders
borders
throughout
across
the
this
that
or
with
educationpolicies.
problem
differences
Fortrate
shares
exam-
similarities
ofa
in on
that
attracting
have
good
and
through
professional
programs teachers
development
includingpolicies
mechanisms,
investment
retaining poor
the to be
Examples
focused many
policyvariety and
state
federal
include
student
a try
of of
to
out
that
will
the
ers you
addressattempts
lack
focus
point
teachers
high-quality
may
their
achievement.
the
that
will
problem
policy
For
ameliorate.
lead-
instance,
tures
education
in
in of
theof
inthe
for the
Act
underlying
Education
introduced
Innovation
problem This
spent
number
Matters description
Time hours
schools.
with
non-U.S.,
was and
of
to
poli-
For
the
extent
federal
example,
nature
problem.
demonstrate
when 7).
and
(p.
is
well
as
as
into
them
bare
is
data policy
adds
?all
Collecting
premises?
value who
on
that
This
assembling
evidence and
y (p.
and
145).
both (1987)
Dunn potential
choices
(2004),
based
supported
factual
for
?the
aspects?
analytical
that
and contains LAYING
causes
solutions
normative THE
note
McDonnell
search
Elmore
FOUNDATION.
into
and
pling
data
t of
including
their
gathering
ultimate
evidence,
o
is is
to
ofThispoint
theconvincing
about
chapter
thethe
largely
process
transformation
assem-
with
facts.
of toI tnot
t .their
i t itofindgut
may
rely
on
makers while
strategies
instincts,
because,
byout
ito
is
ft
to
policysupport
wrong
decisionanalysis
their
more
they
what
requires
evidence-based
Consequently,
the
and,
that
strate world
their
the
factspublic
solution
ultimately,
description that
policy.
be
policy
analysts
choices
regarding
made
imperative
demon- the
persuadedoften
about
appropriate
is analysis.
your
disagree
Policymakers
and
point
Prowevel,
enough
not
are
others
problems
identify
solutions
All
oof
forf
but
writ
large,
policy
the
essence
studies
three
important
are
functions
(3)
Pr
and (2)
by
mplet,
the ato
of
Hthe(1)
eto
identifying
each
action.
Addressing
ons,
policy
from
resulting
outcomes
ase
public
policy
into
are
examining
which
processes
values
transformed
choices
identifying
functions
lead
optimal
these
resolution
to
To
to
offer
also
illus-
leaders
need
data
education
persuasive
arguments,
collect
to
As
will
fea-
identify
the
leader,
an
youdata
collect
need
particular
education that
xpolicy-related
He
(2004)
multiple
notes serves
research
purposes.
summa-
4by
the*
the
Chapter
65
Case
Make
Evidence
Assembling
66 Chapter 4 * Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence
Whatever the reason d r i v i n g y o u r collection of data, y o uw i l l have to asge b l e )

them as evidence to make your case for ap a r t i c u l a r course of action. Biddle (1996) 4 i
serts that the failure of many education reforms is rooted in the lack of evidencethat
underlay their adoption and implementation. He notes:
For want of evidence, our schools often fail to accomplish the key tasks we "
expect of them. A n d for lack of research concerningt h e i r supposedP r o b - !
lems and the actual effects of programs for their ?reform,? the policies we }
initiate in such schools are often misguided, wasteful, counterproductive, or H
destructive.? (p. 12)
M a n y educators applaud the call for data and the requirement o f evidence-baseg
strategies to j u s t i f y education policy decisions (e.g., K o w a l k s i , Lasley, & Mahone , °
2008). M a n y foundations increasingly tie f u n d i n g to a track record that supports the }
l i k e l i h o o d of success or the ability of grant seekers to demonstrate p r o o f of their ace
complishments. A key provision in the N o C h i l d Left Behind A c t of 2001 is that edy.
cation practices have to be grounded i n scientific research. Similarly, the Race to the
Top federal grant also provides incentives for proposals that have empirical evidence f
u n d e r l y i n g them. Notwithstanding the general agreement that w e have to have Policies ;
g r o u n d e d in evidence, there is still disagreement about the most appropriate way to

p r o v i d e support for one?s conclusions.
ASSESSING THE NATURE A N D EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM. A ni n t e g r a l p a r t o f all theSteps

i n p o l i c y a n a l y s i s is s h o w i n g p r o o f of y o u r assertions. I f y o u r c l a i m s are n o t grounded
i n r e a l i t y a n d i n a basic set o f facts o n w h i c h m o s t p e o p l e c a n agree, y o u r arguments
a r e n o t l i k e l y t o b e p e r s u a s i v e ( M c D o n n e l l & E l m o r e , 1987). B a r d a c h (2009) suggests
t h a t d a t a are the basic b u i l d i n g b l o c k s o f d e v e l o p i n g e v i d e n c e . H e d i s t i n g u i s h e s among
data, i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d evidence:
Data are facts. . Information consists of data that have ?meaning,? in the
. .
sense that they can help you sort the world into different logical or empirical
categories. .. Evidence is information that affects the existing beliefs of im-
.
portant people (including yourself) about significant features of the problem

you are studying and how it might be solved or mitigated (p.11).
D u n n (2004) distinguishes among data, i n f o r m a t i o n , k n o w l e d g e , and wisdom.
L i k e Bardach, he notes that data are the r a w facts, and i n f o r m a t i o n is the systematic
o r d e r i n g of these facts in a particular way. He adds that k n o w l e d g e is the result of or-
ganizing the i n f o r m a t i o n in a w a y that is meaningful. W i s d o m comes w h e n this k n o w !
edge offers p r o f o u n d insight.
Data do n o t always have to be quantitative and statistical i n nature (e.g., Bardach
2009), b u t i n establishing the existence o f a policy issue, it is often i m p o r t a n t to use
statistics. For instance, if you argue that student achievement is l o w , it is important to
demonstrate the basis on w h i c h you make that claim. Even if y o u r audience does not
agree w i t h y o u r assessment, at least they w i l l be clear w h a t you mean b y l o w student
achievement. Consequently, policy analysis begins w i t h a descriptive statement of the
c o n d i t i o n g r o u n d e d i n empirical evidence. I t w o u l d likely i n c l u d e ?statistics that de-
scribe the state o f the policy system and p r o v i d e a b e n c h m a r k f o r c o m p a r i n g current
conditions w i t h those o f earlier times or different places? ( M c D o n n e l l & Elmore, 1987,
Chapter 4 ©
Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence 67
?Lidmana n d Sommers (2005) state that the ?compleat policy analyst w i l l love
even if he or she finds them hard to love?( p . 629), a ?
important in establishing policy problems,

aware that numbers are not necessarily an impartial, accurate depiction of real-
vay
Statistics May beinvalid,entered incorrectly, misinterpreted, or misused. M y sister

iv ?ne the story of getting a 91 in Regents math at her high school in New York State
te Ahaving it show up as a one on her report card. Her subsequent grades illustrated
het exemplary performance, but if we took a snapshot look at her performance at the
me that the error was made, we would have considered her a failing student. If this
appens systematically to a group of students and remains undetected, we would be
eeing an inaccurate picture of reality. Numbers by themselves do not necessarily tell
ou about power relationships and w h y a problem exists; they do not necessarily reveal
injdden biases Or differential interpretation and implementation of policy (e.g., Coburn,
9001; Louis, Febey, & Schroeder, 2005). However, similar concerns may be voiced re-
arding non-numeric data: People forget; memories are faulty; individuals may want to
reshape history. It is good to check your facts from a variety of sources, whatever type
of data are beingused.
ASSESSING THE PARTICULAR FEATURES OF AN IDENTIFIED POLICY SITUATION. The

world is a complex p l a c e w i t h interrelated policy problems. Data are not o n l y neces-
sary to establish a n d illustrate the existence of a phenomenon b u t also for d e t e r m i n i n g
the levers b y w h i c h change can occur. A n extensive review of the literature can help i n
the exploration and e x a m i n a t i o n o f relationships between a n d a m o n g key variables.
Assembling evidence i n this w a y can help y o u assess the particular features of an i d e n -
tified problem. It also allows you to determine more credibly which conditions are mal-
leable to intervention and which are not.
ASSESSING PAST POLICIES. In gathering evidence on past policies, you w i l l be able

to get a better sense of the links between particular activities and the outcomes that
they are likely to yield. The data assembled should increase your understanding of
the similarities and differences between the present policy problem and the one from
which you plan to draw inspiration and make inference. Several key questions must be
addressed to make an assessment of the ?past useful for the present: How different or
similar is the problem addressed by past policies to the present phenomenon that you
wish to mitigate? In what ways is the present problem different from the one that past
policies addressed? H o w are they similar? H o w many people were targeted by the past
policy? Did the policy achieve its intended goal? Did it achieve its goal, fully, partially,
or not at all? What are the indicators that support that assessment?
USING THE PURPOSE OF THE EVIDENCE TO D E T E R M I N E

WHAT IS NEEDED
Dunn (2004) characterizes policy analysis as having five key policy-analytic methods:
(1) monitoring, (2) forecasting, (3) evaluating, (4) recommending, and (5) problem struc-
turing. He indicates that each of these methods produces and requires different types
of information. The discussion in the previous chapter addressed problem structuring.
The remainder of this section briefly addresses the information provided b y the other
by
pastpolicies different from or similar to the presen
vouwish T a h a l wa ae the problems different? In what ways are they S e ene tha
How are the circumstances surrounding the cited policy similar or different from the conditions tha
ently describe? YouProg.
Are the major stakeholders the same?
Did the policy achieve its intended goal? Did it achiave its goal fully, partially, or not at aii What arethe
cators that support your assessment? ind).
FIGURE 4.1 Sample Questions t o Ask in A s s e m b l i n g Evidence t o Assess Past Policies
policy-analytic methods of monitoring, prescribing, evaluating, and forecastin

complete discussion of these policy analy tical processes w i l l be addresseqi n subg
quent chapters. Se
Evidence f o r M o n i t o r i n g
A key function of data collection i n public p o l i c y analysis is s i m p l y to gain an unde

standing of what happened. That is, one m a y s i m p l y w a n t to monitor theoutputsn a
sociated w i t h policy intervention. Merriam-Webster?s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Editig
defines monitoring as ?. . watch[ing], keep[ing] t r a c k of, o r check[ing] usufaliy} fe
.
a special purpose.? D u n n (2004) asserts that to ?monitor public policies ina n y given
issue area we require i n f o r m a t i o n that is relevant, reliable, and valid? (p. 278). In as.
sembling data for monitoring, you m u s t be clear about the indicators that wil] allow
you to k n o w if and h o w the phenomenon that you describe has changed over time, For
example, if you are concerned about the n u m b e r o f students w h o complete high school
that n u m b e r w o u l d be an i m p o r t a n t statistic to track. D i d that n u m b e r go up, go down
o r stay the same over a specified time period? I f a change occurred, did it go in the
direction expected or desired? D i d that change correspond to the intervention thatyou
p u t i n place? As noted b y D u n n (2004) and others, the result of assembling evidence for
m o n i t o r i n g is being able to observe policy outcomes. These observations can ultimately
be measured against some normative standard o f w h a t presently exists and what you
w o u l d like to see i n the future.
Evidence f o r Prescription
While m o n i t o r i n g requires s i m p l y the tracking of output, prescription carries with it the

added task of m a k i n g recommendations. Consequently, assembling evidence for pre
scriptions w o u l d n o t only require regular documentation o f specified outputs, it would
© Did the selected indicators go up, down or stay the same over a specified time period?
© If achange occurred, did it go in the direction expected or desired?

® Did that change correspond to the Intervention that you put In place?
FIGURE 4 . 2 Sample Questions t o Ask in Assembling Evidence t o M o n i t o r O u t p u t s

Chapter 4 * Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence 69
« Do you have data that demonstrate pattems?

e Are the patterns that you can Identify linked to particular outcomes? How sure are you of thesa connections?
« Do you want these outcomes? If yes, recommend actions tied to them. if no, recommend doing something
different.
FIGURE 4.3 Sample Questions to Ask in Assembling Evidence for Prescription
also require an understanding of patterns, associations, and causation. For example,

if increasing curriculum standards is systematically associated w i t h higher student
achievement, then you may recommend increasing curriculum standards i f the goal
sought is higher student achievement. The research may suggest, however, that other
strategies have stronger associations w i t h increased student productivity, and you may
choose to prescribe alternate approaches. The evidence you gather and present for pre-
scriptions should be comprehensive enough that it allows you to assess which key pat-
terns of relationships w i l l most likely lead to effective resolution of the policy problem
identified. For example, education policymakers in New York State have long relied on
increasingly rigorous curriculum standards as a means of improving student achieve-
m e n t (e.g., A l e x a n d e r , 1998; B i s h o p , 1996; R o e l l k e , 1996).
Evidence f o r E v a l u a t i o n
Evaluation requires the comparison of data of what is against a normative standard of

what should be. When assembling data to act as evidence for evaluation, the outputs
tracked must provide information required by the goals and objectives of solving the
problem. Evaluation is a normative process where the data has to address notions of
bad and good in some way. Consequently, providing information only on compliance
is not sufficient in completing a comprehensive evaluation of a policy action. There
must be an understanding of how outputs associated with the policy have changed
and if those changes have an impact on outcomes in the way predicted and sought by
the analysts. For example, if policymakers increased the number of rigorous courses
required to earn a high school diploma, at the end of a specified period, they w i l l expect
students to perform better based on a predetermined standard. The data that w i l l be
necessary to make the case for evaluating the success (or lack thereof) of a policy inter-
vention would have to satisfy policy opponents, not only that the condition improved,
but also that that improvement can be tied to the policy implemented. To do this, we
could provide data before and after the policy intervention. This approach allows ob-
servers to know if a change in the policy problem took place and in the way desired.
However, because changes in output could have occurred anyway, you would also
want to have data for schools that did not implement the intervention of increasing the
number of rigorous courses required to earn a high school diploma. This comparison
would allow you to assess more accurately if the pattern of change were substantially
different between those schools that had implemented the recommended policy action
and those schools that did not. To the extent that changes after the policy are in the d e
sired direction and can be tied to your policy actions, you can feel comfortable that you
have made the case that your policy worked. These documented associations contribute
to the extant literature so that they can be used for forecasting.
70 Chapter 4 ¢ Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence
© Do you havea list of indicators for outputs you would like to examine?
© Do you have data on the outputs of interest for your school setting before and after thePolicy interven
© Do you have data on the outputs of interest for school settings that did not Implement the policy erent
* Do you have data on the outputs of interest for other schoo! settings that implemented thePolicy interventon»
FIGURE 4.4 Example of a Data Checklist That Will Help in Evaluating
Evidence f o r Forecasting
A s indicated elsewhere, public policy analysis is largely about m a k i n g Tecommend

tions f o r the future. Because of that, policy analysts must have some idea ofwhat the
future holds. To inject some degree of certainty i n the analytical process, you may t l y
on past trends continuing into the future. When you use data to forecast, youmay be
able to persuade others b y using data to show the c o n t i n u a t i o n of patterns. For ex
ample, Oakes (1990) has argued that if present trends continue, the United States will
be at a disadvantage on the w o r l d stage when it comes to math and science:M inority
populations continue to grow b u t they are n o t represented proportionally in science
technology, engineering, and math. "
Another w a y of forecasting is to use theoretical relationships rather than data for

evidence about w h a t the future holds. Less persuasive f o r m a n y policymakers who
m a y n o t agree w i t h y o u r assessment is conjecture because the evidence that you rely on
is p u r e l y personal.
DETERMINING THE VALUE OF SPECIFIC D A T A

Patton and Sawicki (1993) highlight five basic strategies of gathering data: an inves-
tigative approach, historical data, basic facts, political information, and forecasts and
projection. Investigative approaches entail asking people questions or analyzing docu-
ments. Historical data requires you to gather data that have been collected over time
and reflect key elements of time periods important to y o u r analysis. Basic facts are data
c o m m o n l y collected or known, Political information covers data that address relation-
ships, power, and values. Data from forecasts and projections are based on predictive
theory or projection techniques that reflect estimates of future values. The value ofeach
strategy depends on the data sought, w i t h the use of investigative approaches beingthe
most expensive, and the employment of basic facts the least expensive. Bardach (2009)
argues that, because obtaining data is costly, you need to assess the costs of assembling
evidence against simply guessing. He suggests that m a k i n g an educated guess is appto-
© Do the data show patterns? Do you expect those pattems to continue? Why?
¢ Are you relying on theory to know what will likely happen next? How credible Is that theory?
© Are you relying on expertisa? Who are these experts? Who Is l i k e l yto. ballave thelr scenario of the future?
FIGURE 4.5 Example o f a Data Checklist That W i l l Help in Forecasting

tiate in some instances, b u th e emphasizes that an educated guess m u s t be i n f o r m e d

by previous k n o w l e d g e of the issue.
How Do You Make Good Use o f Data?

BUILDING YOUR ARGUMENT. G o v e r n m e n t a n d other sources produce m a n y statistics
that w i l l a l l o w y o u to p r o v i d e g r o u n d e d indicators o f the assertions y o u are making.
M y advice w o u l d be t h a t assembling basic i n d i c a t o r s to illustrate the existence of a
problematic p h e n o m e n o n is essential f o r b u i l d i n g y o u r a r g u m e n t r e g a r d i n g the i m -
ortance of a l l e v i a t i n g a specified p r o b l e m . T h i s a p p r o a c h requires y o u to d o c u m e n t
what you k n o w and h o w y o u k n o w it. W h e t h e r you s h o u l d collect m o r e facts depends
on y o u r assessment o f w h e t h e r m o r e precise data w i l l lead to substantially d i f f e r e n t
results f r o m w h a t y o u expect w i t h the data y o u presently have (Bardach, 2009).
ASSESSING DATA CONTEXTS. A s n o t e d elsewhere, n o t all data and research are created
equal (e.g., H a l l e r & Kleine, 2001; Kaplan, 1998; K o w a l s k i , Laskey, & M a h o n e y , 2008).
Kowalski, Laskey, a n d M a h o n e y (2008) offer f o u r g u i d i n g questions i n h e l p i n g a d m i n -
istrators and teachers become critical consumers of research:
1, A r e t h e r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s the result of conceptual e x p l o r a t i o n r e g a r d i n g

pedagogy?
2, Are the research findings the result of rigorous research utilizing experimental
designs? .
3. Have the research f i n d i n g s e m e r g e d f r o m m u l t i p l e contexts?

4, Are the research conclusions idiosyncratic to one setting? (p. 158)
The value of the evidence gleaned from research depends partly on your responses
to these questions. If you w a n t to adopt a new pedagogical strategy in the classroom,
simply doing w h a t a neighboring school or state does may not be effective if the
approach is not yet tried and true. Relying on cooperative learning to do a w r i t i n g
assignment in a class where children do not know how to read is not likely to be an
effective approach.
If the innovation is merely a conceptual exploration regarding pedagogy, perhaps
it would be better to implement it on a small scale. If the innovation is based on a rig-
orous experimental design, you may be more confident of the causal relationship pre-
sumed, and you may be more w i l l i n g to invest more resources in its trial. Thei m p a c t
of context also influences the confidence you should place in certain research findings
and its relevance to your particular context, On the one hand, i f an innovation works in
multiple settings, chances are good that i t may also w o r k in yours, If none of those con-
texts are parallel to your situation, however, the data may not be helpful. Let?s say that
the results are based on the conditions of one setting. The more that setting is different
from your particular context, the less applicable are the findings. However, even if the
findings are based on one setting, you may still be more willing to rely on them than on
results tried in many contexts. That is, if that one setting shares several characteristics
with yours, you may be willing to trust that you w i l l obtain similar results trying the
innovation in your context.
H O W TO LOCATE RELEVANT SOURCES
People a n d D o c u m e n t s are K e y
Data come from two principal sources: people and documents (Bardach, 2009)
two categories are comprehensive but are notm u t u a l l y exclusive, People can ;
the data contained in documents, and documents contain information that c o n t i n
to the expert knowledge of people. While educatorsm a y prefer and rely on one u
of data source to get answers to theiru n a n s w e r e dquestions, both arei m p o r t a n t pre
(2004) observes that, regardless of the source, ?the collection of data is notneutral Dat
collection represents political decisions about w h a t typeso f information areuseful
determining h o w the schools are doing? (p. 14). The questions posed by Policymaker
and others should determine the appropriate source and m e t h o d of data collection TS
(Heck, 2004; Kowalski et al., 2008). Note, however, that the process ofcollecting data;
different f r o m that of analysis and decision making. 8
COLLECTION STRATEGIES. C o m m o n strategies f o r obtaining data f r o m people include

interviews, participant observation, surveys, and questionnaires. Methods for gather.
ing data from documents include archival analysis, content analysis, and second
data analysis. What w e obtain from these sources is data that informs our understand.
ing of the essence of a problem, the nature of relationships between and among key
variables, and a foundation f o r our claims.
DATA FROM PEOPLE WITHIN AND OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION. Asa policymaker,
administrator, o r teacher, you may have several questions regarding the effectiveness of
education. You w i l l often need to find a balance between internal and external sources
to get a comprehensive and accurate picture of the education condition you are facing.
You w i l l be able to make more informed decisions b y gathering data from individuals
b o t h w i t h i n and outside y o u r organization.
K n o w i n g the internal workings of your organization is helpful for ensuring thatit
is functioning efficiently and effectively. While it is true that constant measuring does
n o t necessarily lead to better outputs, research suggests that using data to inform your
decisions can lead to more reflective decision making. Being more thoughtful in mak-
ing decisions is helpful, b u t it is also necessary to assess the impact o f those decisions.I f
you are a policymaker at the state or national level, you m a y already have a bird's-eye
view of the potential implications of policy. W h a t you need is a close-up of districts,
schools, and classrooms to k n o w the actual effects of policy on any one institution in
y o u r state o r nation. One w a y to do that is to ask questions of individuals within your
organization and of those who are directly affected b y the policy. You may take one
spot in your state or country and ask the relevant leaders and members ofinstitutions
that are randomly selected about their understanding of the p o l i c y and their perception
of its impact. Another approach w o u l d be to identify sites that seem to be doingpartic
u l a r l y w e l l in implementing a particular state o r federal p o l i c y and then askindividu :
associated w i t h those sites for their sense of that policy, w h a t w o r k s and what does n0
This purposive approach was the strategy adopted b y Louis,T h o m a s , G o r d ".
and Febey (2008). They examine the impact of political culture on a state 8 po? y
m a k i n g mechanism, and they focus on the p o l i c y - m a k i n g mechanisms 1nI n d i a n
Nebraska, and Oregon. They chose those three states because of their similarities
Chapter 4 ©
Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence 73
size but differences in education policy histories. Within each state, these research-
ers interviewed between 8 and 11 education policymakers who represented a diverse
range of positions andorganizations, The authors conducted 1-hour interviews in a
semistructured format,a n d the questions asked revolved around states? accountability
a n d school leadership policies, key education stakeholders, and levels of collaboration
among those stakeholders. The researchers found that political culture matters in h o w
a state responds to leadership and accountability initiatives. This information is im-
ortant for federal p o l i c y m a k e r s as they design policies to have an i m p a c t o n s t u d e n t
achievement.
On the other hand, leaders w i t h i n schools m a y already havea v a r i e t y o f strategies
to collect i n f o r m a t i o n on w h a ti s h a p p e n i n g w i t h i n t h e i r institutions. These strategies
m a y include classroomo b s e r v a t i o n s , ?learning walks? (Wallace Foundation, 2006), a n d
individual meetings w i t h c h i l d r e n a n d parents. Just as leadership at u p p e r levels of
the education o r g a n i z a t i o n a l h i e r a r c h y need to get a closer snapshot o f the c o n d i t i o n
of education on the g r o u n d , educators nearer to the p o i n t of d e l i v e r y also need to get
amore panoramic v i e w i n o r d e r to place their observations in context. K o w a l s k i a n d
colleagues (2008) note, f o r example, that the t i m i n g of observations m a y present v e r y
different pictures o f teacher efficacy. To address that p r o b l e m , the authors argue that
administrators s h o u l d use m u l t i p l e sources and different methods.
DATA FROM DOCUMENTS WITHIN AND OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION. In a d d i t i o n to

observing people?s b e h a v i o r a n d d o c u m e n t i n g their perception, data also exist w i t h i n a
variety of documents. K o w a l s k i a n d colleagues (2008) note that the N a t i o n a l Center f o r
Education Statistics a n d the websites of the different education departments across the
country are the d o c u m e n t sources f o r m u c h of education policy research. M i n u t e s f r o m
meetings, agendas, and other archival data can also p r o v i d e i m p o r t a n t i n s i g h t into the
workings of an organization. F o w l e r (2009) suggests, f o r example, that because of the
importance of language i n school leadership, getting access to that ?talk? can y i e l d i m -
portant insights.
Not to be overlooked are the data provided by other researchers. For example,
Leithwood and colleagues (2004), in an examination of how leadership influences stu-
dent learning, conducted an extensive review of the literature to compile evidence on
the impact of leadership on student performance. They conclude that leadership is
second only to teaching among school-related factors that affect student performance.
They write that it is the conscious linking of leadership practices to student learning
that highlights the importance of leaders to organizations. The direct connections that
leaders can make to the core function of teaching and learning become more difficult as
organizations become bigger and leaders become more removed from the classrooms.
HOW TO C A T E G O R I Z E T Y P E S O F D A T A
Quantitative o r Qualitative Debate
Much research relies on b o t h quantitative and qualitative data. A s the labels suggest,
quantitative data refer to those data that are grounded in numbers, w h i l e qualitative
data refer to those that are g r o u n d e d i n words. Ultimately, the data collected a n d the
analysis used should be g u i d e d b y the questions posed. G r a d y (1998) distinguishes be-
tween the t w o types of data b y d e f i n i n g quantitative data as ?impersonal b u t consistent,
74 Chapter4 © Make the Case by Assembling the Evidence
n u m b e r d r i v e n , ? w h i l e q u a l i t a tive data are ?personal b u t inconsistent, peo Ple driven»

(p. 6). He goes on to highlight nine keydifferences b e t w e e nq u a n t i t a t i v e and
Walitative
analyses based on their purpose, focus, data, instrumentation, reality, value, Otienta. ?
tion, conditions, and results. Purpose refers to the goal of the analysis, Focus r e f
the u n i t of analysis that you are targeting f o r change. Data refers to the nature of i °
that you assess, p r i m a r i l y numbers or p r i m a r i l y words. Instrumentation refers toa
m e t h o d used to collect the data. Reality denotes the nature of the environmentthat te
w o u l d like to describe. Values refer to the methodological a n dP h i l o s o p h i c a lc o n e
that d r i v e y o u r analysis. Conditions indicate the l i m i t a t i o n i n w h i c h y o u rfindings hold
true. Results refer to the actual findings and their i m p l i c a t i o n f o r the field and Practig
In general, Grady argues that quantitative analysis strives f o r predictability angn e ,
trality, w h i l e qualitative analysis strives f o r dynamic, rich, and value-explicit results
Heck (2004) offers a useful summary of the type of research questions that arethore
appropriately addressed using quantitative versus qualitative analysis. Questions regard.
ing h o w many, how often, and causal relationships are especially appropriate for quantita.
tive methods. Questions pursuing how, w h y , and processes lend themselves to qualitative
approaches. Heck (2004) also indicates that quantitative analysis is particularly suited for
nonexperimental, experimental, and quasi-experimental research designs. For case studies
and historical analyses, he suggests that both approaches are appropriate depending on
the research questions being explored. Grady (1998) argues, however, that case studies
anchored only in quantitative analysis w o u l d likely produce flat and thin data, with littl
substantive and practical implications for policymakers and practitioners. In the end, edu-
cation leaders must decide how best to make their case w i t h the data at hand.
Chapter Summary
This chapter r e v i e w e d the basic details of the ating, you need to document the changes associ-
tasks associated w i t h getting the appropriate ated with the policy. To the extent that changes
data to conduct y o u r analysis. The discussion of- occur in the desired direction and can be tied to
fered w a y s to think about data so that you are your policy actions, you can feel comfortablethat
prepared, n o t only to p o i n t o u t problems and to you have made the case that the policyworked,
i d e n t i f y solutions, b u t to ground your analysis If changes cannot be tied to policy actions or do
i n r e a l i t y in o r d e r to be more persuasive. The not occur in the direction sought by policy p>?
chapter also considered the variety of data that ponents, you can make the case that the policy
can serve as evidence and the u t i l i t y of each did not work. Assembling evidence for forecast:
type d e p e n d i n g on the purpose of the analysis. ing may lead you to presume that past tren s
Evidence m a y be assembled to buttress problem will continue into the future. eand
structuring, monitoring, prescribing, evaluating, Data p r i m a r i l y come from people a
and forecasting. I n assembling data for monitor- documents, and we often classify them as qi be
ing, e x p l i c i t indicators must be present to allow tative or quantitative. By now, you shou licy-
y o u to k n o w if and h o w the phenomenon that familiar w i t h the different sources of Pm to
relevant information and should be t e y n
y o u describe has changed over time. Assembling
transform data into knowledge. As YoU Be nal?
evidence f o r prescriptions w o u l d n o t only re-
data to knowledge and from legwork to in the
quire r e g u l a r d o c u m e n t a t i o n of specified out- sis, you should be ready for then e x t maf drive
puts, it w o u l d also require anu n d e r s t a n d i n g of process: establishing the values that
p a t t e r n s , associations, and causation. For evalu- your analysis.
review Questions
Asaneducation leader, w h y w o u l d y o u gather sponse. Provide examples from your profes-
1.
data? H o w does y o u r r a t i o n a l e tie i n w i t h the
sional context in your response.
various purposes of policy analytic research? 5. How do you transform data into evidence?
9, W h a t is y o u r p r e f e r r e d s t r a t e g y o r s t r a t e g i e s Give an example.
for g a t h e r i n g data? W h y ? 6. Reread the chapter-opening education vi-
3, What is y o u r f a v o r e d a p p r o a c h f o r data gnette. W h i c h data do y o u t h i n k are needed?
analysis? W h y ? Is this approach particularly Is this response d i f f e r e n t f r o m the one y o u
suited to a specific p o l i c y analytical function? gave w h e n y o u started the chapter?
4, Do y o u agree t h a t there is a difference be-
tween data a n d evidence? E x p l a i n y o u r re-
"News Story for Analysis

?More teaching, less money.? National Post ( £ / k / a a college certificate have u p to 75% success, s i m i l a r
The Financial Post) (Canada). N o v e m b e r 3, 2008 to that of non-aboriginal j o u r n e y m a n a n d college
Monday. National Edition. B Y L I N E : L o m e Gunter, grads. And, compared w i t h non-aboriginals w i t h
National Post. S E C T I O N : E D I T O R I A L ; L o r n e degrees, a b o r i g i n a l C a n a d i a n s w h o have c o m -
Gunter; Pg. A l 4 . pleted university even havea s l i g h t l y better s h o t at
Those w h o are h o p i n g that o u r aboriginal employment in their field.
citizens [in Canada] w i l l be lifted o u t of p o v e r t y In other words, where they possess the re-
and dependence b y the b i l l i o n s of federal dollars quired training and skills, aboriginal Canadians do
currently being p u m p e d each year into aboriginal not face barriers to finding work.
communities and p r o g r a m s ? n e a r l y $11,000 per The trouble comes when looking at w h a t
man, woman a n d child for First Nations, I n u i t and percentage of both groups achieve each level o f
Metis?should stop h o l d i n g their breath. M o n e y is secondary and postsecondary learning. Obtaining
neither the p r o b l e m n o r the solution. a high school diploma has become ?nearly uni-
The problem is a lack [of] education. And versal? among non-aboriginals. ?Nearly 90%
until Canada corrects the education gap between have done so,? says Prof. Richards. However,
its aboriginal and non-aboriginal citizens, there even among non-aboriginals aged 20-24 ?about
will be little improvement in conditions, no matter 40% lack high school certification,? according to
how much money is slathered on aboriginal com- Richards.
munities with the very best of intentions. M o r e t r o u b l i n g still, this y o u n g e s t g r o u p
Last week, the C. D. Howe Institute released o f w o r k i n g - a g e aboriginals m a y be regressing.
a fascinating, yet ultimately disheartening study A m o n g those 25?44, the p r o p o r t i o n w i t h o u t a d i -
on the ?education gap.? ploma is just 32%, meaning that after falling for
Author John Richards, a public policy pro- nearly three decades, the dropout rate may be ris-
fessor at Simon Fraser University, first offers ing among aboriginals, even as it continues to fall
what should be considered very hopeful statistics: in the rest of the population.
According to his calculations based on the 2006 Similarly, 68% of non-aboriginals aged
census, employment rates for aboriginals and 25-34 have some form of postsecondary training,
non-aboriginals are nearly the same at compara- compared to 50% among those 45 and o l d e r ?
ble levels of education. .
showing a growing commitment to education
Meanwhile, aboriginal Canadians w i t h a b e y o n d h i g h s c h o o l . Yet a m o n g a b o r i g i n a l s ,
high school diploma have an almost identical em- ?the p r o p o r t i o n w i t h a u n i v e r s i t y degree a m o n g
ployment rate (just over 60%) [compared] to non- those under 45 has increased v e r y l i t t l e relative
_
Aboriginals w i t h a diploma. Those w i t h a trade or to those over 45.?

Also distressing is the news that while aboriginal Canadians start turnin
education. 8 away from
the generation of aboriginals aged 35-44 out-
performed those over 45 in obtaining some type Prof. Richards
i
suggests t u r n i n
.
?
|
of postsecondary training, the generation aged reserve schooling to boards independe On.
25-34 seems to have fallen back to the older gen- politics, and that off-reserve public sch n t o f b a n g
eration?s levels: About 40% of aboriginals over 45 most aboriginal k i d s are taught)s h o u l d . (Wher
have some education beyond high school vs. 47% the involvement o f aboriginal leadersa n d . Case
of those aged 35-44, but just 42% of those aged ?set measurable targets for improvements |
25-34. data to identify aboriginal studentsw h i
Prof. Richards contends this m a y indicate achieving. © ate Not

j
t h a t aboriginal Canadians w a i t until they are i n That?s probably sound advice, Buthere? 8
their 30s to go to college, trade school o r university, a d d i t i o n a l idea: The decrease i n aboriginal
o r it m a y ?signify a more disturbing phenomenon; cation a t t a i n m e n t corresponds to the rece r a e }
stagnation i n intentions to undertake postsecond- creases in w h a t w a s already hearty federalf a n |
ary training among young aboriginals.? i n g f o r aboriginals. Perhaps we are subsidj ne |
Given that the f o u r westernmost provinces the decline. Iing '
have far and a w a y the largest First Nations popu- W h i l e it is n o t possible to live lavishly 9
lations, and that i n those provinces one-in-eight federal handouts, i t is possible to do mote th ni
c h i l d r e n f o u r years o l d o r y o u n g e r (one-in-four survive. Concurrent w i t h adopting Prof, Rjchards? i
in Saskatchewan and Manitoba) is aboriginal, the recommendation, we m i g h t w a n t to remove the:
social and fiscal i m p l i c a t i o n s w i l l be staggering disincentives to education inherent in the current |
o n the Prairies, i n B. C. and i n the territories if f u n d i n g structure.
Source: Material reprinted with the express permission of: ?National Post Inc.? i
4
1. Given the data cited, d o you t h i n k that an edu- 3. Do you agree with the conclusions drawn by the
cation p r o b l e m exists f o r Canada?s aboriginal author of the article? Explain your response.
citizens? Explain. 4. W h a t a d d i t i o n a l data w o u l d you like to see in
2. U s i n g the discussion in the chapter, w h a t are order to buttress o r rebut the assertions and con-
the types o f data used to support assertions in clusions of this author?

this article?
se l e c t e d W e b s i t e s
M i n n e s o t a D e p a r t m e n t of Education ( M n DoE). The Wallace Foundation. Available at
A v a i l a b l e at www.wallacefoundation.org/Pages/default.asp.
http:/leducation.state.mn.us/mdelindex.html. The official website of The Wallace Foundation,
The official website o f the Minnesota Department of a nonprofit foundation that supports and shares
Education. The department's mission is to ?[i]mprove ideas and practices to improve learningand en-
educational achievement by establishing clear standards, richment opportunities for children. The site corr
mensuring performance, assisting educators and increasing tains national surveys, summaries of field know
opportunities for lifelong learning.? These are all strategies edge, and practical guides on a variety of policy
that require the use of data. Education leaders may find issues affecting children. Education leadersmay
this website helpful to see h o w data are collected and find this website interesting because of the ren ?
made available for a variety of purposes. The site also availability of data. They can click on theK a s
contains direct links to data files that education leaders edge center tab for access to a variety of artici€>
can use to documenta variety of education problems. reports, and tools.
5. Department of Education. Institute of Education Education Sciences. The National Center for Education
U. vances. National Center for Education Statistics Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for col-
(NCES). A v a i l a b l e at lecting and analyzing data related to education i nt h e
pww.nces.cdg o v . United States and other nations. Education leaders
would find this website helpful because of its wealth
T h e official website of the National Center for
of data on numerous education issues.
Education Statisitcs, located i n the Institute of
Selected References
Biddle, B. J. (1996, December). Better ideas: K a p l a n , A. (1998). The conduct o f i n q u i r y :
E x p a n d e d f u n d i n g for e d u c a t i o n a l research, M e t h o d o l o g y f o r behavioral science. N e w
Educational Researcher, 25, 12-14, B r u n s w i c k , NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Biddle argues that there is an u r g e n t need to fund, Kaplan provides an excellent o v e r v i e w of social
review, and disseminate the knowledge generated science research methodology. Education leaders
b y educational research. Education leaders m a y f i n d m a y find this book h e l p f u l i f they w o u l d like a m o r e
this article interesting for the v i e w p o i n t it presents detailed assessment o f the standards and strategies
on the use o f data (or lack thereof) i n education. used for social inquiry.
Coburn, C. E. (2001, S u m m e r ) . Collective sense- K o w a l s k i , T., Lasley, T. J., & M a h o n e y , J. W. (2008).
making about reading: H o w teachers mediate D a t a - d r i v e n decisions a n d school leadership: B e s t
reading policy i n t h e i r professional c o m m u n i t i e s , practices f o r school improvement. N e w York:
Educational E v a l u a t i o n & P o l i c y Analysis, (23)2, Pearson Education.
145-170. Kowalski and his colleagues offer a practical guide
Coburn researches the relationship between instruc- for using data to evaluate education programs. They
tional policy and classroom practice. This paper uses argue for increased reliance on data to make sound
an in-depth case study of one California elementary decisions on what policies work well for children.
school to examine the processes by which teachers Education leaders may find this book helpful for the
construct and reconstruct multiple policy messages. information it provides on conducting sound evalua-
Education leaders may find this article interesting tions in school environments.
because the author highlights how building lead-
L i d m a n , R., a n d Sommers, P. (2005, S e p t e m b e r /
ers can help shape how teachers use data and make October). T h e ?compleat? p o l i c y analyst: A t o p 10
sense of policy. list. P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, (65)5, 628-634.
Grady, M . P. (1998), Q u a l i t a t i v e a n d a c t i o n research: This article provides a quick a n d enjoyable read o n
A practitioner handbook. B l o o m i n g t o n , I N : P h i the use of data i n p o l i c y analysis. I t touches o n the
Delta Kappa Educational F o u n d a t i o n .
role o f uncertainty in the policy analytical process.
Grady provides a good overview of research using Education leaders may find this article u s e f u l be-
qualitative methods and design. Education leaders cause i t serves as a r e m i n d e r that, w h i l e y o u w a n t to
may find this handbook useful because it provides make the best use of data, the process o f t r a n s f o r m -
a quick way to learn or refresh their knowledge of i n g data into evidence is not perfect.
data collection and analysis in a way that will help
Louis, K. S., Febey, K., & Schroeder, R. (2005,
them do research in the field.
Summer). State-mandated a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i n h i g h
Haller, E., & Kleine, P. F, (2001). Using educational schools: Teachers? i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f a n e w era.
research:A school administrator's guide. New York: E d u c a t i o n a l E v a l u a t i o n & P o l i c y A n a l y s i s , (27)2,
Addison Wesley Longman. 177-204.
The authors offer a practical guide for school The authors collect data on the perspectives of
administrators about how to understand and use implementers of policy to assess the effectiveness
educational research. Education leaders may find of that policy in changing practice. Their findings,
this a useful resource for guiding how they use data using qualitative analysis, suggest that teachers?
?o inform their decision-making process. interpretation of accountability policies were
Student Learning]. Educationa]

associated w i t h their efforts to change classroom Administration
practice. Education leaders may find thisarticle Quarterly, (44)4, 562-592,
interesting because of the insight it provides on the Louis and h e r colleagues examine the eff,
connection between the perception of implementers culture on states? p o l i c y - m a k i n g mec h a n to f Poli
and the likely effectiveness of policy. These kinds of article provides another example of how Sms, Th:
l i n k s can help education leaders identify patterns, leaders can use the i n f o r m a t i o n Provided:d u c a t i o n
make credible forecasts, and make informed recom- literature to i n f o r m their decision-mak; N extant
mendations on related policy. this case, for example, education lea d e r s . Process, ty
Louis, K. S., Thomas, E., Gordon, M., & Febey, the mediating effect o f political culturea m e t Note
K. (2008, October). State leadership for school into account i n their identification ofp a t e take that
casts, and p o l i c y recommendations, ?s, fore.
improvement: An analysis of three states [Part of
the special issue entitled Linking Leadership to
Establish Your Driving Values
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After reading this chapter, y o u w i l l be able to:
« Identify explicitly the values that you care about

« Establish evaluative criteria
« Write a description of what success looks like
« Identify the specific criteria that frame policy discussions
# Describe basic economic concepts as they apply to policy analysis
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
You are the chief state school officer in your state a n d have recently pored through the
literature on class size reduction, alienation, peer effects, and academic achievement, You
sit and ponder the readings and what their findings mean for children, the values that you
hold, and the policies you should recommend. You wonder if you should increase busing
or simply give parents more flexibility in choosing a schoo! for their child. You wonder if you
Should raduce class size or rely m o r e on technology and teacher aides, ?
As you think of ways to make schools serve their students better, what values will you
bring fo help you in making your choices? If this process leads to confilcting results, which
value will uttimately drive your policy decision?
79
80 Chapter5 ¢ Establish Your Driving Values
W H A T D O YOU CARE A B O U T ?
Chapter 5 focuses on establishing and reflecting on the values thatw i l l

choose among the various policy options available. As a policy leader help You
student, your path is full of choices that must be made. Examples oft a k i n a
abound, as the next three paragraphs illustrate. 8 Choicgs
In an era of cutbacks, leaders of local governments,i n c l u d i n g school distr:

wonder if they should require all their employees to take leave without a ?Strict, May
balance their budget. Maybe leave without pay is an effective way to bJf e l Order jy
get, but would this approach be fair? Ce the bug.
School board members may have to choose amonga group of superint

didates to determine who should lead their district. H o w can they be surethenwette -
ing the right choice given the multiple hats that superintendents wear as leas a e Mak.
education community? What are the appropriate criteria that they should ys TS of
them make their choice? © to help
Increasing numbers of high-achieving students are considering differenth i

education options. Students are increasingly w e i g h i n g the prestige of anin s t i n e
against its costs. With the recession, more students are choosing to go toc o m m u n :
colleges rather than attend more highly ranked public and private universities inan
attempt to save money.
The fact is, w h e n there is no ideal solution, w e often have to make the best
decision w i t h i n the constraints that w e face. Each of o u r decisions varies accord.
ing to o u r values. In Chapter 1, I briefly discussed the w o r l d v i e w s and priorities
that shape our decisions. Being aware of and reflecting on these values will allow
you to be transparent i n the decision process and i n the evaluative criteria that you
establish.
ESTABLISH E V A L U A T I V E CRITERIA
Relationship Between Values and Criteria
The groups and individuals involved i n the decision process influence the values that
one ultimately uses to select among different policy alternatives. Criteria are simply a
concrete, working definition of these ideals. For example, if we value equity, we may
ask whether a particular policy w i l l lead to a fair distribution of benefits and costs.
To the extent that we care about the answer to this question, equity is a criterion that
w i l l help us choose among alternatives. Perhaps we value efficiency and favor those
policies that w i l l lead to greater bang for the buck; that is, w e may beparticularly
concerned about the ability of a policy option to deliver more of a specified impact for
relatively little input. .
With this type of reflection, you can define and establish useful criteria. The ctr
teria may be derived from your analysis of documents or from interviews in which 0?
values that stakeholders consider important are discussed and explored. As you r h
sider your choices, you may be able to determine the broader ideologicalposition wi
which your choices are consistent. You may also be able to tell if there are any the
inne
contradictions in the values that w i l l surface as a result of your choice. In essencé: ty

criteria selected say something about your assumptions regarding the role of society:
government, and the economy (e.g., Fowler, 2009).
Chapter 5 © Establish Your D r i v i n g Values 81
some instances, policymakersw i l l bep u r p o s e f u l l y vague i n letting you k n o w

siderations OF criteria influencet h e i r decision. This ambiguity m a y allow them
what the broadest baseo f support possible; however, it is not h e l p f u l i n n a r r o w i n g
100 olicy options.T h u s , asp o l i c y analysts, it w o u l d be better to have explicit criteria
or to make the decision-making process transparent and to be clear about w h a t
i no r?offs m u s t be made. ; ;
; .
ide establishing evaluative criteria, three big questions will guide your analysis:
Will the policy resolve thep r o b l e m being defined? Is it an effective policy? Does it
1. eem like it will-work at least in theory?
W h a t are the consequences of implementing that approach? W h a t are its impacts
2. and on whom? Aret h e s e impacts different for different constituencies?
4,
Is thep o l i c y workable g i v e n the constraints that exist? Is it feasible? (Policies that
°
look good on paper m a y n o t be workable given the particular constraints o f one?s
specific context.)
The answers to these questions w i l l be influenced by the stakeholders in the process.
WHAT DOES SUCCESS L O O K LIKE?
Let us start w i t h the f o u r b r o a d concepts for setting up evaluative criteria: goals, objec-
fives, criteria, and measures (Patton & Sawicki, 1993). Goals are the obverse o f the prob-
lem and serve as the idealized ends. Objectives aret h e specified targets associated w i t h
the identified goals. Criteria are the w o r k i n g definitions of the values that both constrain
and drive your decision. Measures are the specific observations or calculations that p u t
idealized concepts i n concrete, quantitative terms. Addressing each of these concepts
helps you to clarify the problem and to determine what its resolution w i l l look like. For
instance, if the problem is that too f e w students are graduating from h i g h school w i t h i n
4years, the goal for resolving that problem w o u l d be a higher number of students grad-
uating from high school w i t h i n 4 years. I f y o u r problem definition and y o u r goal seem
unrelated, you need to redefine y o u r problem, restate your goal, or both.
From the goal or goals described, you w i l l be able to develop objectives. As noted,
objectives are more focused and concretely worded statements about end states. In
other words,like goals, objectives are future-oriented. Unlike goals, they address a defi-
nite population and timeframe. Objectives move us away from the more lofty ideals
described in the goals and toward specific, concrete, and reachable ends. It is essential
to define objectives once the goals of a program or policy have been identified, This
approach allows evaluative criteria to be developed for each objective, and multiple
measures of each criterion to be devised.
,_
Ctiteria are even m o r e specific than objectives. Bardach (2009) describes criteria as
Mental standards for evaluating the results of action? (p. 37). They are explicit state-
ments about the dimensions that w i l l be considered to evaluate alternative policies and
outcomes. In other words, they are the w o r k i n g definitions of the values that w i l l deter-
Mune in turn which option you choose to resolve the problem being described.
f n tSasures are the most specific of the above concepts and are tangible operational
ofw h e of criteria. I n other words, the measure gives readers a real understanding
at good results for each criterion look like. I t is n o t enough to state that y o u w i l l
w them when you see them. Policy analysis is a collective enterprise and requires
82 Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Your DrivingValues
icit guidance for those interested i n y o u r decisions. B u s i n

o o r a u i e n c e to k n o w w h a t y o u consider to be a b e t t e r state o f a f f a g o e sY o u
the criterion is effectiveness, w h a t results w o u l d w e h a v e to see f o r us? For exam,
the p o l i c y is effective? I nt h e caseo f ex ante analysis, w h a t w o u l d o u hCong;deci
for you to consider that the p o l i c y is l i k e l y to w o r k ? I f p a s t policies area c 10 ent
h i g h levels of proficiency o n theN a t i o n a l Assessment o f E d u c a t i o na l p . otiate a r e

it w o u l d be reasonable to p r e s u m e that s i m i l a r p o l i c i e s w o u l d have si TOBTess ay tt
o f effectiveness. I f the criterion considered is e q u i t y , w e w a n t to b e able t yhigh tle
d i s t r i b u t i o n a l implications of p o l i c y actions. For e x a m p l e , A l e x a n der (199g n i t e gy
f i n d s that, while m a n d a t i n g a r i g o r o u s c u r r i c u l u m is associated w i t h in + 2002,
exam scores i n N e w Y o r k State, t h e y are also associated w i t hw i d e r a c h i n Over

between the top- and b o t t o m - a c h i e v i n g students. These f i n d i n g s suggestt h e Bing
based policies, sine q u a non, w i l l n o t lead to m o r e e q u i t a b l e d i s t r i b u t i o n s Stand

performance for those p u p i l s w h o are the least w e l l s e r v e d b y the present ¢o f Studen,
rest of this section discusses more f u l l y the c o n c e p t u a lu n d e r p i n n i n g s of speciicang
W H A T ARE THE SPECIFIC C R I T E R I A T H A T F R A M E P O L I c y DECISions)

The types of criteria used to frame policy decisions depend on the values of
k e y Stakehol.
ers, the nature of the problem, the objectives sought, and the alternative Policies or
grams under review. While criteria may vary from problem to problem, they often t e
address what matters to policymakers, target groups, taxpayers, and other stakeholieg
In the end, what often matters are the answers to these five questions: (1) Does it work? Q
Is it fair? (3) Can we afford it? (4) Will people support it? and (5) Who w i l l implement i?
Does It Work?
When we ask if a policy is likely to work, we are essentially making an argument for
considering effectiveness, or what Patton and Sawicki (1993) call technical feasibility.
This criterion gauges whether particular policy options can resolve the problema t hand
Technical feasibility is important to include in all policy analyses because if our actions
do not improve society, what is the purpose of conducting the analysis in the first place!
Effectiveness measures whether the policy o r p r o g r a m achieves its purpo#
Because we are focusing on ex ante analysis, our ability to answer the question Does
work? depends on our ability to make connections between the proposed courseof
. tion and extant research o n the l i k e l i h o o d o f its success.
HOW WILL YOU KNOW? Using knowledge gained from research on similar a i
you can assess to what degree the proposed action is likely to accomplisht h e anne
jectives. As part of that analysis, you should be able to discern if you can ae se
in the real world back to the program proposed. In documenting your e e ct long
should also be aware if the effects of the program are likely to be direct or I" nd Savi i
term or short-term, quantifiable or not, and adequate or inadequate.Pattonthe vogral
(1993) indicate that impacts are direct if they address a stated objective o f ee le
and indirect if they create an impact not associated w i t h a stated objective n as one
many supporters of charter schools cite h i g h levels of parentals a t i s f a c iene dl
the benefits of this reform (e.g., Vanourek, Manno, & Finn, 1998). I f the s
Chapter 5 © Establish Your Driving Values 83
y able to trace the changes in the real world to the proposed program?
Age nanges documented directly or Indirectly related to the proposedprogram?
te ranges documented likely to be evident in the short-term or long-term (more than 5 years)?
able to document these changes in numbers or do you have to use words?

are you
anges that you see or expect to see likely to result in a full resolution of the problem identified?
»
of
nrethe
55.1 Does I t W o r k ? T e m p l a t e t o G a u g e I m p a c t ( E f f e c t i v e n e s s ) o f P o l i c y O p t i o n s
piGuR .
form is to improve student achievement, then improved parental satisfaction

the * considered an indirect impact.
may t , ong-term impacts are experienced some time in the future. The lack of immediacy
«their impact may influencet h e perceivedeffectiveness of the program. For example,

forts to improve teacher quality by restructuring teacher education programs are not
likely to have an immediateeffect. New teacher candidates who experience the reform
w i l l be affected initially, but a time lag exists between the time when teacher candidates
are in education programsa n d the moment they enter the teaching force. Consequently,
we may presume thatc hangesi n schools that are linked to changes in teacher education
rograms will not happenimmediately. The evolution of the workforce and changes in
socialization and pedagogical practices may not become evident until teachers who were
trained before the reforms in the teacher preparation programs took place have retired.
Adequacy refers to the ability of the program to resolve fully the stated problem or
fulfill the stated objective. It measures h o w far toward a solution we can proceed w i t h the
resources available. Capturing adequacy is a growing concern among many educators,
and it has been the center of education discourse in reference to the appropriateness of
school finance mechanisms. Currently, four key strategies have emerged from leaders
in education finance on the appropriate working definition of adequacy. Guthrie and
others have argued that professional judgment should be used to determine the appro-
priate funding for schools (e.g., Guthrie, 1983), Odden (2000) favors looking at success-
ful schools as benchmarks for determining adequate funding. Reschovsky and Imazeki
(2001) advocate a cost function approach, which is essentially the inverse of the tradi-
tional production function methods. There is also a state-of-the-art methodology that is
deeply entrenched in the use of existing evidence and statistical procedures. More re-
cently, Alexander and Schapiro (2009) have argued for the creation of an adequacy con-
dition index in the same w a y that we have indicators of fiscal conditions. The search for
adequacy is not only a quest for greater effectiveness but also a pursuit for greater equity.
Is It Fair?
reimesei s closely related to equity. When education leaders think about equity, they are
__.
considering how the benefits and costs of policy are distributed. That is, both the
mrPact of policy and the cost of its implementation are important. Equity is about the
both o n e of goods or services among individual members or subgroups. The focus is

datt h e consumption side (who benefits?) and on the production side (who pays?).
fan,
d indicators of dispersion are important, and measures such as range, standard
84 Chapter5 © Establish Y o u r D r i v i n g Values
deviation, and coefficient of variation are commonly accepted in the field (eg, B
Steifel, 1984; A Decade of Standards Based Education, 2006; Odden &Picus 2 0 0 0 " e&
Equity is significant when the differential impact of a policychangei s i m )
Because policy changes are often intended to modify existing discrepancies portant
becomes one about whether certain groups or individuals w i l l experience ad i s € issue
tionate share of the burden or w i l l receive windfall benefits. We wantfairness n e
terms of who has to pay for a policy and those who enjoy (or suffer from) the me in
of a policy. Pact
Five basic principles are often discussed in the literature regarding equity: hor
zontal equity, vertical equity, transitional equity, ability to pay, and benefitsprincint ?
A l l these concepts relate to equal and nondiscriminatory treatment; that is, pen r
should be treated similarly unless there is good reason for thedifferentiation, h i
often difficult to tell what constitutes a good reason, and there is still widedisagree
ment on the appropriate role of states, districts, and schools in the matter of achieving
social equity.
HORIZONTAL EQUITY. This definition of fairness calls for the equal treatment ofequals
but does not go beyond the basic concept to provide a working definition of whatthat
means for the practitioner. It may be applied both to the impact and the cost ofPolicy
options. For example, policymakers disagree about the fairness of establishing gifted
and talented programs: Some argue that it is unfair because children are not being given
the same opportunities, and others argue about the appropriate grouping of students
(Kelly, 1991). Crace (2006) highlights the varying definitions of gifted and talented of.
fered by multiple organizations, ranging from the top 2% to the top 10% of students,
One of the problems w i t h the simple application of horizontal equity is knowing what
makes for equally situated entities. Because each child is unique, it is difficult to tell
which characteristic is a legitimate distinction vis a vis policy options.
VERTICAL EQUITY. This conceptualization of fairness refers to the distribution of

goods and services to those i n unequal circumstances. But what constitutes unequal
circumstances? For example, should the population be subdivided by region, city, or
neighborhood? Should subgroups be categorized by their ethnicity, income level, IQ,
achievement score, or socialization skills? It assumes that differential treatment would
result in those who need more resources getting that support and in those who need
less getting less.
¢ Is your policy likely to promote horizontal equity? Will there be a consistent impact on members of groups
affected by the policy?
© Is your policy likely to promote vertical equity? Will the policy have a differential impact on targeted groups?
Will more vulnerable groups get more support?
Does your policy address transitional equity? Does your policy include provisions for easing the transition for
groups adversely affected by any change in rules that your policy caused?
© Who will bear the brunt of paying for this policy? Will the payment for this option be tied to income or to those
who receive a benefit from the proposed program?
FIGURE 5 . 2 Is It Fair? Q u e s t i o n s T h a t Gauge t h e E q u i t y I m p l i c a t i o n s o f Policy O p t i o n s

Chapter 5 ©
Establish Your Driving Values 85
As seen from the example about gifted and talented programs, the appropriate
distinction ofu n e q u a lcircumstances is difficult to capture. Making this distinction be-
comes even more problematic when the screening process used to identify beneficia-
ries of a program seems to produce uneven results. For example, African Americans,
Latinos, English language learners, and students eligible for free or reduced lunch have
long beenunderrepresented in gifted and talented programs. Members of the Equity
in Education Coalition have argued that policymakers should eliminate the practice of
jabeling children as gifted and talented and simply provide all students a similarly ac-
celerated program. Vertical equity not only requires appropriate grouping but also ap-
propriatedifferentiation in the distribution of resources among groups. Consequently,
achieving vertical equity is even more challenging than achieving horizontal equity be-
cause, if we treat everyone the same, we are at least accomplishing the equal treatment
of equals on some level.
Considerations of vertical equity are not only relevant in a domestic context b u t
also on the global stage. In many countries, girls have lower participation in formal edu-
cation than boys do, students in rural schools have fewer opportunities for higher educa-
tion than students in urban areas, low-income students achieve at lower levels than their
wealthy peers do, and students w i t h disabilities have few opportunities for integrated
schooling. When groups or individuals have been treated unfairly i n the past, vertical
equity often requires the reallocation of resources to ensure more equitable outcomes
in the future. For example, the third Regional Conference on Secondary Education i n
Africa (SEIA) held in Ghana i n 2007 focused on the development of a report for the
World Bank Institute. This document was a comprehensive report on how participat-
ing nations could enhance equity in gender, regions, abilities, and wealth for the good
of their country. For example, to address gender equity concerns, policymakers in some
participating countries may have to update their facilities as they change from single-sex
to co-educational settings (e.g., New Vision, 2007). More recently, in 2011, members of
the Forum for African Women Educationists Uganda (FAWEU) held a fundraiser to pay
the university school fees for bright girls from poor families (New Vision, 2011).
To address the inequities in access to secondary education in rural regions, many of
the SEIA conference participants called for universal secondary education to accompany
past policy efforts at universal primary education. In Uganda, for example, the govern-
ment implemented universal secondary education in 2007. Also in 2007, the president of
Ghana, John Agyekum Kufuor, indicated that the government of Ghana would initiate
education policies that focus on improving secondary education in that country. The
proposed reform included enhanced access to technology, vocational and agricultural
training, and partnerships with the private sector (e.g., Public Agenda, 2007).
In Central and Eastern Europe, policymakers grapple w i t h policies on h o w to
achieve vertical e q u i t y vis-a-vis children w i t h disabilities, Large numbers of c h i l d r e n
with disabilities do n o t have access to mainstream schooling i n the region, Instead they
are often institutionalized o r h i d d e n away i n their homes. U n i t e d N a t i o n s Children?s
Fund (UNICEF) Senior A d v i s o r of C h i l d r e n w i t h Disabilities, Rosangela Berman-Bieler,
urged governments to r a t i f y the Convention on the Rights of Persons w i t h Disabilities
held i n Russia i n 2011. Ratification of the convention w o u l d signal the s u p p o r t ofs i g -
Natories for policies o f inclusive education for children w i t h special needs. This w o u l d
include access to free p r i m a r y as w e l l as secondary schools (United N a t i o n s Children?s
Fund, 2011). To facilitate this access, education leaders m a y have to b u i l d access r a m p s
86 Chapter 5 Establish Your Driving Values
to buildings, reconstruct buildings sot h a t they have elevators, hire reading special
for those w h o m a y need that accommodation, and so on. Cialists
In addressing h o w children f r o m different b a c k g r o u n d s and a b i l t i e s a r e
cated, education leaders may have to reconsider h o w they presently allocate res
Some communities are better situated than others to respond to the chan 8s b e
about b y education reform. Consequently, p o l i c y m a k e r s m a y have to facilitat, pete
communities make the transition f r o m the status q u o to greater e q u i t y among its Ow
lation w i t h different needs. Popu-
TRANSITIONAL EQUITY. Fairness i n this context means that w e h o l d people harmi

for the changes that we make in policy. We note if the rules of the game changed to the
detriment of certain classes. We also consider the possibility of compensatingthe ] .
ers for the change in rules. For example, in Minnesota, policymakers created afundin,
stream in the 1990s where school districts w o u l d be p a r t l y compensated for thee x e
money that they had to expend on having more experienced teachers. ThatP o l i c y was
changed, however, where there w o u l d be no offsetting resources based on the experi.
ence level of teachers. To help school districts deal w i t h that loss o f revenue, a transition
clause stated that school districts w o u l d continue to be compensated f o r those teachers
hired in the years w h e n the law was i n effect, b u t that revenue stream w o u l deventually
disappear for new hires.
When the Australian government adopted a n e w school f u n d i n g formula in 2001
m a n y schools w i t h older, more experienced staff members received transition payments
to ensure continuity. Previously, schools were funded f o r the actual cost of their teacher
payroll, regardless of h o w many junior o r experienced teachers they had. Under the
new model, schools in Australia were funded on an ?averages in, actuals out model.?
That model meant schools would be funded for teacher salaries at the state average for
each position regardless of the actual payment made b y schools (Jones, 2000). Thus,
schools w i t h higher proportions of experienced teachers w o u l d lose funding, while
those w i t h lower proportions of experienced teachers w o u l d gain.
M a n y so-called hold harmless clauses that exist i n present l a w are attempts to
ensure that groups can transition smoothly w h e n the rules of the game have been
changed. However, they often mean that the costs of i m p l e m e n t i n g the policy are in-
creased. Increased costs turn our attention to the question of w h o pays.
ABILITY TO PAY. While the concepts of fairness discussed here m a y be applied both
to the impact and costs of policies, ability to pay focuses on the equitable distribution
of costs. Under this definition, it is essential to consider the ability o f individuals to
make the payments. Using this definition of fairness, one?s ability to pay is linked to
income. The literature offers three descriptive categories of distribution of payments:
regressive, proportional, and progressive. A regressive s y s t e m is one i n which the
p r o p o r t i o n of income collected increases, on average, as income levels decrease. A pro
p o r t i o n a l system describes one where the proportion of income collected is the same,
on average, regardless of income levels. A progressive system of revenue collection is
one where the proportion of income collected increases, on average, as incomeleve
increase. Note that these are descriptive statements in which the values of the policy:
makers direct the appropriate distribution. In an education setting, tying payment .
services to the ability to pay of individual constituents may result in, for example,
Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Your Driving Values 87
echnology fee being charged to all higher education students whether or not
sliding &
technology facilities on campus. A t the elementary and secondary school lev-

they use
Js,
many schools now charge fees for extracurricular activities, where children from
families with higher incomes pay more for these activities than their less privileged
zers. Anotheri llustrative example of the ability to Pay principle in action is the fed-
r a and state subsidized lunch programs offered in P-12 schools. With this program,
vpildren who are from families below an established level of income are eligible to
lunch at a discounted cost or for free.
receive
peNEFITS PRINCIPLE. T h i s concept of fairness is predicated on the existence of a l i n k

petween those w h o pay f o r a particular p o l i c y option and those w h o receive its benefits.
pecause of the natureo f m a n y p u b l i c l y p r o v i d e d services, establishing this l i n k m a y
be difficult. For schools, this m a y mean charging those students w h o participate i n ex-
tracurricular activities f o r the cost of those programs. Because this expense m a y i n h i b i t
students w i t h less means f r o m participating, a potential cause f o r concern i n terms o f
vertical equity crops up. M a n y school leaders grapple w i t h the appropriate f u n d i n g f o r
noncore programs, especially i n an era o f shrinking budgets. M a n y policymakers have
chosen to balance b o t h the benefits and ability-to-pay principles. They havea s l i d i n g
scale for participation i n after-school activities, where o n l y those w h o participate have
to pay, but the school subsidizes students w h o need the financial support.
CAN W E A F F O R D I T ?
What Is t h e R o l e o f E c o n o m i c s ?
Economics is f u n d a m e n t a l l y about the allocation of resources, w h i c h serves as a good

foundation for making decisions i n p o l i c y analysis. Y o u should be able to i n f o r m y o u r
thinking about the a f f o r d a b i l i t y o f the options that y o u are considering. Where m o r e
precise information is unavailable, you should still be able to rank the likely cost of each
option as being m o r e or less costly than the other. When t h i n k i n g about costs, equity
considerations m a y come into p l a y because the dollar o r other resource i m p a c t on one
group is often not the same as that on another.
Common checks of the fairness of the distribution of costs and benefits are done
by looking at differential impact based on residential location, income class, race and
ethnicity, age, sex, f a m i l y status, homeownership status, as well as current versus f u -
ture generations (e.g., Bardach, 2009; D u n n , 2004; Patton & Sawicki, 1993).The eco-
nomic literature discusses w h o should be considered in costs and benefits. As cited i n
Patton and Sawicki (1993), T r u m b a l l identifies five principles in determining standing:
(1) willingness to pay b y affected parties, (2) ex ante perspective, (3) cost-benefit analy-
sis viewed w i t h i n the context of the big picture, (4) evaluation consistent w i t h physical
and social constraints, and (5) preferences of all w h o are affected taken into account.
Policymakers and analysts alike often b o r r o w economic concepts to establish cri-
teria from which a recommendation is made. A full-fledged discussion on economics is
beyond the scope of this text, b u t it is useful to be familiar w i t h key economic concepts.
The economic concepts h i g h l i g h t e d i n this discussion include opportunity costs, private
versus public benefits, provision versus production, counting costs, and decision tools.
¢ importance of this discussion is to understand and to make clear to y o u r audience
why one policy option is better than another based on fiscal considerations.
88 Chapter 5 © Establish Your Driving Values
OPPORTUNITY COSTS. In an economic framework, costs are more than ?ust

pocket expenses of purchasing certain goods a n d services. Costs alsoi n c l u d et h e O u t
t u n i t y lost by choosing one option rather thana n o t h e r . I n technical terms, 9
cost includes the loss of both tangible and i n t a n g i b l e resources devote to AP ottuny
(Patton & Sawicki, 1993). O p p o r t u n i t y costs are at the h e a r t of the policya n a
o m m e n d a t i o n : an explicit recognition that, b y choosinga p a r t i c u l a r w a y of o s re
the p r o b l e m , y o u m a y be closing off other avenues of resolution. Because , esolvin
are scarce, you w i l l not be able to do everything t h a t y o u w o u l d like to do a n d
choices have to be made. For example, education leaders m a y find thatt h e h e l e
choose between having more classrooms w i t h fewer c h i l d r e n o r fewer classroy a v e t
m o r e children. H a v i n g smaller class sizes is associated w i t h h i g h e r studenta c h e
ment i n the early grades, b u t this strategy has implications f o r the n u m b e r of tea ne
hired and the b u i l d i n g space needed. However, h a v i n g l a r g e r class sizes may ha en
negative impact on student achievement and the need f o r b i g g e r classroom Space¢
h o l d m o r e children. In 1996, education leaders i n C a l i f o r n i a opted to reduce class «i te
across the state, resulting i n an acute shortage o f space and certified teachers. Theod
d i t i o n a l need for teachers p r o m p t e d b y the n e w p o l i c y is associated w i t h an increase j
the p o r t i o n o f uncertified teachers among staff (Class Size, 2004), m
PRIVATE VERSUS PUBLIC BENEFITS. M a n y policymakers argue that public intervention

is appropriate only w h e n the market does n o t do certain activities well. When indivig-
ual activities are l i m i t e d to private impact, there m a y be no need f o r government action,
Understanding the distinction between public a n d private benefits is often the founda-
tion f o r p r o v i d i n g justification f o r government action i n addressing a problem rather
than leaving its solution to private entities (Bardach, 2009). M a n y economists argue that
a good rationale for public action is w h e n market failures exist.
M a r k e t failures occur w h e n the market is unable to allocate resources efficiently
because of a gap between conditions that are best f o r society a n d the aggregate of the
conditions that are best for individuals w h o make u p that collective. That is, the whole
is bigger (or at least different) from the sum of its parts. This disconnect occurs when
the net costs faced b y individuals are different f r o m those of society, perhaps because
a single supplier o r buyer has distorted the price, i m p a i r i n g the ability of the market
to allocate resources appropriately. The market is able to allocate resources efficiently
w h e n there are no transaction costs, b u t there are f e w collective actions that will have
no transaction costs associated w i t h them. Transaction costs are costs associatedwith
the exchange of goods or services for money or k i n d o r i n the implementation of policy.
For example, the cost of busing inner-city youth to the suburbs goes beyond the explicit
money spent on transportation. The children incur costs i n terms o f time spent onthe
bus and the more intangible costs of alienation f r o m leaving one?s community.
Individuals may n o t be w i l l i n g to pay for a good o r service that they can enjoy
w i t h o u t payment i f they can get a free ride. A free r i d e occurs i f ani n d i v i d u a l enjoy
the benefit of a good or service w i t h o u t incurring the costs of p r o v i d i n gt h a t good
service. I f every person chosea free ride, eventually, society w o u l d not be able to af on
sufficient quantities of the good or service, even if its provision w o u l d improvethe ? to
m u n i t y as a whole. For example, in Minnesota, open-enrollment plansa l l o w studenc i
attend public school outside their residential school district as long as there15 § tstu:
space in that school. The state of Minnesota still covers the costs o f thenonresiden
Chapter 5 © Establish Your Driving Values 89
d the state aid follows the child. The open enrollment policy thus offers oppor-
dent. for children in some f a m i l i etos attend public schoolsi n districts outside their
residential and taxing jurisdiction. Because children can attend school outside
theif Jocal school district and taxing jurisdiction, connections are weakened between
ublic school that theyattend and the local school taxes that their families must pay.
the r i l d attends school outside the residential district, his or her family has little in-
ave to agree to pay higher property taxes when asked to do so i n local school fund-
c e r referenda. Whetheral o c a l referendum is passed in the residential school district,
the school that the child attends outside the district would not be financially affected.
However, if a child attendeda school in a district for which the local school funding
referendum was successful, that child would benefit from the additional funds raised
to supportt h a tdistrict s schools.I n an economic sense, the most positive financial out-
come for families is for theird i s t r i c t to have a failed referendum (thus not increasing
their school tax) and for the nonresidential school district to which they send their child
to have a successful referendum (thus having more resources for its schools). As long
as there is space available in neighboring districts w i t h good schools, families have an
economic incentive to have referenda fail in their district and pass i n others. This is the
educational equivalent of a free ride, where families can benefit from more resources
being spent on schools without paying the additional costs. If every family chose that
outcome, however, eventually no school district would pass local school referenda and
no additional resources would be raised. Alexander (2002) documents instances where
families in Minnesota oppose referenda in their school district w i t h the intention of
sending their child to a higher-spending, higher-tax neighboring community under
open-enrollmentp l a n s .
The presence o f externalities also creates a gap between aggregate n e t benefits
of individuals and that of society as a whole. Externalities are the effects to w h i c h the
market assigns n o value b u t still have an impact on society. Patton and Sawicki (1993)
assert that the goal of public p o l i c y is often to a d d the value o f externalities i n t o the
market decision.
PROVISION VERSUS PRODUCTION. Policy options come w i t h p r o v i s i o n and p r o d u c t i o n

considerations. Provision refers to w h o w i l l pay f o r the program; p r o d u c t i o n refers
to the technical delivery o f the good o r service. It is i m p o r t a n t to distinguish b e t w e e n
the two processes. For instance, there is general agreement i n the U n i t e d States about
public provision o f e l e m e n t a r y and secondary schooling. H o w e v e r , debate a b o u t
public delivery o f these education services is increasing (Carnoy, Jacobsen, Mishel, &
Rothstein, 2005; Finn, M a n n o , & Vanourek, 2000). The typical student i n the U n i t e d
States attends a t r a d i t i o n a l p u b l i c school, w h i c h is f i n a n c i a l l y s u p p o r t e d b y the use
of local, state, and national revenues. The education services received are u s u a l l y de-
livered b y governmental organizations that are under the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f local school
boards. In 1992, charter schools w e r e born. These organizations are labeled p u b l i c
schools because the b u l k of their f u n d i n g comes from public dollars, b u t their services
are typically delivered u n d e r the management of private entities. W h i l e p r o p o n e n t s
of vouchers may argue t h a t dollars should f o l l o w students to whatever schools they
choose, the dollars to w h i c h t h e y are referring often i n c l u d e public dollars. For ex-
ample, in Florida, m o r e t h a n 25,000 l o w - i n c o m e students use vouchers at over 1,000
Private schools (e.g., L i m , 2010).
90 Chapter 5 © Establish Your Driving Values
COUNTING THE COSTS. Costs are an obvious constraint that m u s t be ackn

in m a k i n g realistic policy choices.I n economicp a r l a n c e , costs are synonym ee 4
resources used rather than s i m p l e expenditures i t e m i z e d i n budgets, M e e s With
cost-benefit analyses that w e use toi n f o r m o u r decisions on thea f f o r d a b i n Of the
v i a b i l i t y of policy options focus on the additionalb e n e f i t s and costs ofi m p l e m ? :
a program. Three economic considerations d o m i n a t e these analyses: tangibire .

costs, m o n e t a r i z a b i l i y of costs, and direct nature o f costs. Tangible impacts ility of
counted. Monetarizable impacts can be counted i n m o n e t a r y terms,Direct c o n t be
be directly ascribed to the selected program. Legislative i n t e n t can determine can
pact is direct o r indirect. W h i l e direct costs m u s t be c o u n t e d i n the final cost analy
Patton and Sawicki (1993) indicate that the decision to i n c l u d e i n d i r e c t Costs is 4 Ysis,
ter of public policy. Mat.
Policy analysts often take a broad v i e w o f costs and consider botht h e M o n e t :
a n d nonmonetary aspects of the decisions made. W h e r e possible, it m a y be easie
compare policy options if costs are measured on the same scale, w i t h a dollar y.t to
placed on even those items that do n o t have specific d o l l a r costs associated with
them. For example, K i n g (1994) adopted a comprehensive cost approach in her eval
uation o f three education reforms. W h e n costs w e r e n o t available i n Monetary terms,
she monetized the value of the extra time that teachers w o u l d have to spend workin ,
i n order to implement a particular school r e f o r m successfully. W h e n there wasne
consistent w a y to capture the intangible costs and benefits associated w i t h Particular
programs, she described these intangibles so that readers c o u l d understand the cost
as best as possible.
COSTS VERSUS BENEFITS. Just like goals seem to be the m i r r o r image of problem defiri-
tions, benefits are the f l i p side of costs. As Patton and Sawicki (1993) note, benefits can
be direct o r indirect, tangible or intangible, short- o r long-term. While costs may have
more measurable dimensions, quite often benefits m a y be harder to p i n down in terms
of actual numbers, Patton and Sawicki thus suggest the use of comparable marketplace
prices to get an idea of what one is likely to gain or lose from the impact of particular
alternatives. Important considerations also include an understanding of the effect of
scaling up or d o w n of programs and whether a change i n scale w i l l fundamentally
change its average costs. Such a change introduces economies or diseconomies of scale.
Economies o f scale exist w h e n increasing the size o r scale of the program leads toa re-
duction in its average cost. Diseconomies of scale occur w h e n increasing the size of the
program causes its average cost to increase. For example, if increasing the numberof
students participating in an online course did not lead to increases in the total costs of
p r o v i d i n g the course, expanding this program w o u l d lead to economies of scale. That
is, as the costs are distributed among more students, average costs decrease. By con
trast, if rising numbers of students lead to a strain on the system and increasedtechnice
difficulties, ultimately raising the average cost of delivery, then the program woul
experience diseconomies of scale.
When considering the costs and benefits of a d o p t i n g and implementing 0 e e
gram, w e still want to address whether the program has a differential impact ond i f t
ent groups. By addressing this issue, we are incorporating e q u i t y considerations 7
the financial possibilities that exist. To the extent that we are n o t counting every
w h e n costs and benefits are being considered, political dynamics are at play.
Chapter 5 ¢
Establish Your Driving Values 91
@ Is this policy within our budget?
« what other options are being excluded if we choose this policy?
Will the benefits of this policy accrue primarily to individuals or to the collective?
» Are the benefits of this policy greater than what it costs?
«How does the cost of this policy compare to other options that could be used to solve the problem? Is it higher,
lower, or about thesame?
FIGURE 5.3. Factors Affecting Affordability
pECISION TOOLS. Y o u can use standard economic tools of analysis to h e l p i n choos-

ing among policy options. Y o u can evaluate the affordability of i n d i v i d u a l projects b y
conducting a simple cost analysis, or y o u can compare their economic feasibility w i t h
other options b y e m p l o y i n g cost effectiveness or cost-benefit analysis. Because y o u m a y
be working u n d e r t i g h t deadlines, it m a y be helpful to look at the literature f o r existing
evaluations of programs to get a sense o f the relative cost of the options that y o u are
considering.
How CAN YOU TELL? W h e n y o u b r i n g an economic perspective to decision making,

you pay more attention to the efficiency and affordability implications o f policy choices.
Generally speaking, efficiency occurs where there is an absence of waste. Economists
often adopt the m o r e technical economic definition o f Pareto efficiency, where the ex-
isting allocation of resources are such t h a t no one could be made better off w i t h o u t
making someone else worse off. That is, there is no slack i n the system.
While e f f i c i e n c y requires a ratio and describes a relationship between inputs and
outputs, simple cost analysis ( a f f o r d a b i l i t y ) focuses on the inputs used to produce a
particular output. Economic efficiency requires that the benefits to be gained i n the use
of resources be m a x i m i z e d ; a f f o r d a b i l i t y requires that you have sufficient resources
to implement the policy o p t i o n considered. Efficiency can be considered a continuous
variable, w i t h different degrees o f efficiency being demonstrated b y variations i n the
return on investment associated w i t h different policy options. This return represents a
balance between the cost o f i n p u t s and the benefits received. Because different policy
approaches m a y y i e l d different outputs, it is h e l p f u l to use cost-benefit analysis as a
means of standardizing the net benefits expected from each project. While cost, cost-
effectiveness, and cost-benefit analysis can yield useful information on the resources re-
quired by a policy option, they are only tools; you (or y o u r boss) are the decision maker.
USING THE ECONOMIC TOOLS. Cost analysis seeks to identify the costs associated w i t h
conducting a particular alternative. Cost effectiveness measures the relationship be-
tween inputs and o u t p u t s b u t does so b y keeping either the costs or the objectives con-
sistent across policy options. W h e n the objectives of p o l i c y are h e l d constant, the goal
of this analysis is to accomplish a certain objective at m i n i m u m cost, When the costs are
held constant, the goal of this analysis is to achieve as much of the stated objectives as
Possible w i t h i n the cost constraints. For b o t h simple cost and cost effectiveness analysis,
only costs need to be monetized. W i t h simple cost analysis, there is no assumption re-
garding the profitability, feasibility, o r economic efficiency of a program.
92 Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Y o u r D r i v i n g Values
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS A cost-benefit analysis p r o v i d e s a framework b

total costs m a y be compared to the total benefits of a program. That is, both. ch the
benefits need to have dollar values attached to them. Projects are evaluates and
other totally monetized policies using net present values o r benefit cogtr a t i o againg
lytical tools. Present values capture the value of costs and benefits ase xpressed -
value of dollars used today. Present value conveys the n o t i o n that enjoying a in
service n o w is better than w a i t i n g to enjoy it i n the future. Consequently,t h e a i Or
f u t u r e payments and future benefits have to be discounted to reflect the notig Ue of
p a y i n g a dollar a year from n o w is n o t as p a i n f u l as h a v i n g to Pay it now. s; Nthat
getting a dollar a year from n o w is n o t as h e l p f u l as enjoying the use of the qollar toa
In other words, w h e n you calculate the present v a l u e of costs and benefits, these q ay,
values are discounted (i.e., standardized) to reflect the same timeframe. olla
Feasibility is achieved whenever the present v a l u e of the benefits exceeds th
present value of the costs. Net present value is the difference between the discounted
dollar value of benefits and the discounted dollar value of costs. I f the net present Value
is greater than 0, the project is financially feasible. The b e n e f i t cost ratio is the ratio
of the discounted value of benefits over the discounted v a l u e of costs. If this ratio is
greater than 1, then the project is financially feasible.
W I L L PEOPLE SUPPORT IT?
When making decisions i na collective, it is i m p o r t a n t to have the support of key stake-

holders. By asking yourself if people w i l l s u p p o r t a particular option, you are essen-
tially getting at its political viability. Some stakeholders are more influential than oth-
ers. Y o u w i l l have to consider the potential i m p a c t of y o u r p o l i c y option on relevant
p o w e r groups such as legislators, administrators, citizen coalitions, neighborhood
groups, unions, public officials, influential citizens, and other sources of power and
political alliances. Citing Marshall, Mitchell, and W i r t (1989), H e c k (2004) suggests that,
i n state educational policy making, there are five rings of influence: insiders, near circle,
far circle, sometimes players, and forgotten players. These f i v e terms were defined in
Chapter 3. It m a y be crucial to have the support of insiders, b u t it is also important to
give voice to all the stakeholders, including the forgotten players.
Who supports this policy option?
Are the people who support this policy option insiders, forgotten players, or at other levels of Influence?
Are the people who oppose this policy alternative insiders, forgotten players, or at other levels of influence?
What is the priority of this policy for those who support it? Are supporters in favor of any change oF 87° they
wedded to this approach?
: , HI
What is the priority of this policy for those who oppose it? Are opponents against all change, oF do they
dislike this strategy?
What are supporters of this policy willing to give up to ensure that this policy option is passed?
What are opponents of this policy willing to trade to make sure that this policy option dies?
FIGURE 5.4 Questions Regarding Political Acceptability

C h a p t e r 5 * Establish Y o u r D r i v i n g Values 93
w acceptable Is the A l t e r n a t i v e t o Different Groups?

0
sess the acceptability ofdifferent alternatives to different groups, we must exam-
To a5 nat the various actors believe about the problem and what they need or want.
ine art of that initial political analysis, you must document the base positions of key
AS r ; and note their nonnegotiable points. By addressing these points, you can deter-
ge P e t h e r a policy is acceptable to actors in the political process and if clients and
other actors are receptive to any change in the status quo,
w h a t Factors I n f l u e n c e t h e P o l i t i c a l A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f P o l i c y ?
Heck (2004) identifies seven factorst h a t can have an impact on what he calls the action
situation: (1) participants,( 2 ) their positions, (3) the set of allowable actions and their
inks
to outcomes, (4) potential outcomes that are linked to an individual sequence of

actions, (5) level of control thatparticipants can exercise, (6) information available to
actors about the structure of the action situation, and (7) the costs and benefits that
they assign to outcomes (p. 143). Participants are those who can influence the policy
rocess; their positions are the stances they take in support of or opposition to pat-
ticular policies. The set of allowable actions consist of the strategies that are within the
legal, fiscal, and social parameters of the community that you lead. Potential outcomes
are the strategies and practices that education leaders deem effective from their knowl-
edge of practice and the literature. The level of control refers to the flexibility afforded
to stakeholders to make the decision on what gets done. For example, many federal
judges have ruled that challenges to state school funding models are outside their p u r -
view and that they are a matter for state judges and policymakers (e.g., San Antonio
Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 1973). The costs and benefits assigned to op-
tions will influence the decisions education leaders make. The presumption is that in-
dividuals want those outcomes in which their benefits exceed their costs. Because par-
ticipants face different constraints, have different costs, and employ different power
rationales, their individual assessments of what is beneficial may be different from
what the collective decides.
The acceptability o f a p o l i c y is also based on the perceptions o f relevant stake-
holders that the p o l i c y chosen w i l l m e s h w i t h the values of their c o m m u n i t y . I f d e -
cision makers perceive t h a t the p o l i c y o r p r o g r a m w i l l meet c o m m u n i t y needs, it
isgenerally more acceptable. N o m a t t e r h o w responsive stakeholders c o n s i d e r an
option to be, however, the p o l i c y action m u s t be consistent w i t h existing laws, rules,
and regulations, .
How Can You M e a s u r e t h e A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f a Policy?
Fowler (2009) makes s i m i l a r points i n h e r summary of p o w e r relationships and the use

of a modified PRINCE (probe, interact, calculate execute) analysis taken f r o m C o p l i n
and O'Leary (1998), The f r a m e w o r k requires an ordering of key stakeholders i n groups
Opposed to o r in s u p p o r t o f a particular p o l i c y action. For each of these groups, y o u
document their stance on the issue, indicate their relative power to influence the issue
a t hand, and consider the p r i o r i t y that t h e y place in s u p p o r t i n g o r opposinga particular
Policy option. By m u l t i p l y i n g the values placed on each factor for each group, y o u can
eeta sense of the strength of s u p p o r t o r o p p o s i t i o n that each group assigns to a par-
?ular policy. By summing all those in favor and comparing that sum to the sum of all
94 Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Your Driving Values
those against, you have a rough estimation of the political viabili an

c o n s i d e r e d . The v a l u e s t h a t y o u assign to each g r o u p are subjectiy @,
b u t q e e l i y ob
grounded in the literature. ey shou)=
e
H o w Can You Change t h e A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f a Policy Intervention»

By conducting a PRINCE analysis, you can p i n p o i n t the greatest Suppo
© Bea
extc h a l l e n g e 5 a particular policy approach. For example, if you estimate
does n o t have sufficient support, it could be because of the telatively l o w » . 2 pol,
to it by its supporters, the relative lack of p o w e ro f its supporters, or the b e t bine
ture of the support given. Once you have identified wheret h eWeaknesg he ma
a
devise a course of action that could lead to c h a n g e i n the dynamic. S £8, you cay
of Su Po
altering the viability of the option. You m a y also
. decide that thep o l i tical og. i thus
i n g t h i s o p t i o n m o r e acceptable are n o t w o r t h it. Sts 9 Mak.
W H O WILL IMPLEMENT IT?
N o matter how gooda policy seems to be in theory, if it does not get implem
does n o t work. What would allow a policy to be more than w o r d s on Papera n d , it
flect
change in real life? This type of t h i n k i n g underlies considerations of a d minig n
ative
operability. W i l l the people who are i n charge of i m p l e m e n t i n g the change bew
illing
o r able to do so?
is There Sufficient Administrative Capacity?

The answer to this question addresses whether it is possible to implement theProposed
policy or program w i t h i n the political, social, and administrative context. It isimpor.
tant to raise questions of implementation authority early i n the analytic process, both tp
avoid settling on an alternative that no one can i m p l e m e n t and to identify changes that
w i l l be needed in order to establish implementation a u t h o r i t y for potentially superior
alternatives.
WHAT ARE THE MAJOR ORGANIZATIONAL LIMITATIONS? When considering organiza-

tional limitations, it may be helpful to consider Bryson (1988), w h o highlights four key
problems that can affect the implementation of a strategic plan: h u m a n problemsin the
management of attention, process problems i n terms of the management of strategic
ideas, structural problems in the management of p a r t - w h o l e relations, and institu-
t i o n a l problems in terms of the appropriate exercise of transformative leadership. The
p o l i t i c a l culture of the broader environment may also influence administrative culture
and the willingness of implementers to accept change.
HOW CAN YOU TELL? You can follow some general guidelines that address whet
your policy options can be implemented. These guidelines may be summarized i
difference from the status quo, (2) policy instrument, (3) support of personne?
(4) available resources. You can create a template using these key categories a e le
score each policy based on how well it did on each dimension of its ability t0 e be Pe
mented. The higher the overall score, the policy would be considered more likely
implemented, other things being equal.

Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Y o u r D r i v i n g Values 95
« Will the proposed policy lead to organizational changes, power dynamics, and outcomes that are different
from the status quo? Are these differences small or large?
e What policy instrument does this option require?
« Dothe people who have to implement programmatic changes support this policy?
e Will this policy require reallocation of existing resources (including time)?
e Will this policy require additional resources?
FIGURE 5.5 Questions to Ask for Assessing Likely Ease or Difficulty of Policy implementation
Difference from Status Quo. The m o r e different a p o l i c y is f r o m the status quo, the
more time and o t h e r resources w i l l be needed for it to be f u l l y i m p l e m e n t e d . T h i s
situation m a y be the r e s u l t o f p r a c t i t i o n e r s l a c k i n g sufficient authority, o r perhaps
the learning curve of f u l f i l l i n g n e w responsibilities is steep. Simple r e f o r m presents
fewer implementation challenges t h a n radical restructuring. For example, if you are
thinking about going f r o m a j u n i o r h i g h school f o r m a t to a m i d d l e school format, this
may be a d i f f i c u l t t r a n s i t i o n if y o u r current system is structured to house p r i m a r i l y
elementary programs, f r o m k i n d e r g a r t e n to grade 8; j u n i o r h i g h schools, grades 9 a n d
10; and senior h i g h schools, grades 11 a n d 12. For some countries, a major r e s t r u c t u r -
ing effort m a y i n c l u d e t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f single-sex h i g h schools into coeduca-
tional institutions.
Policy Instrument. The type of policy instrument chosen also influences the ability
of policy options to be implemented. McDonnell and Elmore (1987) note that mandates
require the highest level of capacity on the part of implementers whilecapacity-building
policy instruments require the least. The opposite is true for policymakers, whose re-
sponsibility it is to fund those policies. Mandates are rules that lay out what needs to be
done; those who do not follow the rules face specific consequences. Capacity-building
policies are strategies where policymakers invest in expanding the capabilities of the
community or organization by enhancing or developing the learning, knowledge, and
skills of those targeted by the policy. More details on policy instruments are provided
in Chapter 6 and w i l l be revisited in discussions of implementation in Chapter 10.
Personnel Support. A n o t h e r factor that affects the likely implementation o f ap o l i c y

option is if the field staff and personnel s u p p o r t it. Fowler (2009) notes that policy i m -
plementers ?usually w a n t to r u n a good p r o g r a m that benefits children, [but] they also
have personal interests at stake? (p. 322). Consequently, those policies likely to enhance
the professional reputations of implementers and improve their chances of career ad-
vancement may be better s u p p o r t e d than those that seem to d i m i n i s h their reputations
or limit their authority.
Available Resources.The existing capability of the groups expected to f u l f i l l the re-

Sponsibilities proposed in the p o l i c y also influences the ability of the policy to be imple-
mented. You m a y use research and ask questions of implementers to determine i f the
Proposed resources are sufficient for f u l f i l l i n g the objectives of the policy. The greater
© 8ap between the resources
called for and the resources on hand, the less likely that
the Policy will be implemented successfully. Key areas to look at are the equipment,
Physical facilities, and other support services that are in place. As noted by McDonnell
96 Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Your Driving Values
and Elmore (1987), ?. . . identifying resources a n d constraints is h o wP o l i

sess w h a t is feasible . . .? (p. 146). Thei m p o r t a n c e o f P r o v i d i n g sufficie Maker,
for the successful implementation of policy is u n d e r l i n e d b y a Policy statn t r e s o n
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). It urgesp o l i c y m a k e r s t o t by ie
necessary f u n d i n g to schools to ensure that schools offer all Students sounde t wet h
opportunities (e.g., CCSSO, 2010 p. 5). a t i
W H A T IF THE CRITERIA CONFLICT?
Values sometimes conflict. Actions that are theoretically the mosteffective

the biggest political and administrative challenges. Radical action may lead to e l face
change, b u t dramatic change can ruffle feathers and be costly. The semina l w e n t
O k u n (1975) discusses the trade-off between the values o f efficiency and equalir by
suggests that policies that are the most equitable are n o t the most efficient, a n¥d
versa. Should you choose the option that maximizes the Opportunity to achieve th te
equity o r the one that maximizes the chance of greater efficiency? This question hoe
not have one right answer because the answer varies w i t h the context. Thekey pein
is that by establishing criteria, you identify y o u r d r i v i n g values, which allows You to
reflect on y o u r o w n choices and to be informed about w h a t people would beWilling to
give up i f values conflict w i t h each other.
Reflecting on what you really care about and the d r i v i n g values of all decision
makers i n v o l v e d i n the process pays dividends, w h i c h w e discussed earlier in this
chapter as well as in Chapter 1. The priorities y o u or other decision makers bring deter.
mine the choices that are available should the criteria conflict. I f there is disagreement
on priorities, a decision rule may be needed, which m a y lead to an ordering of criteria
through consensus building, majority vote, unanimity, or unilateral decision making on
the part of the person in charge. Bardach (2009) suggests that you should also catego
rize criteria in a hierarchy of ?must haves? and wants. In this way, you will weigh the
?must have? criteria more heavily than those that are s i m p l y desired.
=
E e eel
eee e e e T a r e e r a m e n m e w e m e a e R A R t e O e NNAN R E L L a e
% m O E
Chapter Summary
ideals. In
You have n o w learned about the third step of c o n c r e t e , w o r k i n g d e f i n i t i o n s o f these
the policy analysis process: establishing your you Ww
selecting appropriate policy options,

d r i v i n g values. This chapter focused on estab- likely ask yourself these five questions: i e d
lishing and reflecting on the values that w i l l it work? (2) Is it fair? (3) Can weaffo imple
help you choose among the various policy op- Will people support it? and (5) Who w ,
tions available. The groups and i n d i v i d u a l s ment it? Your chosen criteria willthus ts cost
i n v o l v e d i n the decision process influence the the effectiveness of policy, its equiys imple
values that you ultimately use to select among its political viability, and its ability t
different policy alternatives. The political pro- mented. .
are goins 0
cess and c o m m u n i t y mores help to determine
Now that you know how you eate the#
whose values count and w h o provides i n p u t choose, it is time to discuss how to S e, whic ¥
into the discussion. Once the desired vision for ternatives from which you will cho
society has been established, criteria provide the subject of Chapter 6.
Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Y o u r D r i v i n g Values 97
neview Questions
R What would be your top concer in making 4. G i v e n the discussion o f costs, h o w w o u l d
heducation policy? H o w does this concern re- key concepts influence the discourse on
flect your driving values? vouchers and open enrollment programs for
What do you t h i n k is t h e r o l e o f p u b l i c elementary and secondary schools?
2 schools in promoting social equity? What ra- 5. Is an equal distribution of resources the
fonale underlies your response? What poli- s a m e as a f a i r d i s t r i b u t i o n o f r e s o u r c e s ? G i v e
cieswould you support? What policies do a rationale for y o u r response.
you oppose? Why? ;
3, Do you agree w i t h the n o t i o n that ethical de-

liberations do n o t enter into the analysis of
costs and benefits? Explain y o u r response.
?News Story for Analysis

?A class of their own; Schools hope single-sex edu- I n today?s p o p m u s i c landscape, d o m i -
cation will help boys excel.? National Post ( £ / k / a The nated b y the likes of Eminem, 50 Cent a n d Justin
Financial Post) (Canada). October 16, 2010 Saturday. Timberlake, chart-topping songs d o not extol the
National Edition. B Y L I N E : K e n y o n W a l l a c e , virtues of w o r k i n g hard at school.
National Post. SECTION: C A N A D A , ; Pg. A12. It?s been a l o n g time since songs l i k e Sam
When the E d m o n t o n Catholic School Board Cooke's 1960 hit, W o n d e r f u l W o r l d , i n w h i c h the
holding seminars next month on the cre- protagonist sings about h o w he ?Don?t k n o w m u c h
ins
ation of an all-boys academy, it will become the lat- about history,? o r most other academic subjects, b u t
est educational body to take up what is becoming vows to w i n the heart o f his baby b y w o r k i n g h a r d
an increasingly popular idea. to become an A student, dominated the charts.
Another Alberta school board, the Calgary ?We've gone from a culture where young
Catholic School District, has j u s t started its first men wanted you to think they were smart to one
school year offering segregated classrooms from where they want you to think they're gangsters,? |
Kindergarten to Grade 6. Last N o v e m b e r , C h r i s said Dr. Leonard Sax, a psychologist and author of
Spence, the Toronto District School Board's direc- the book Boys Adrift. : |
tor of education, announced his intention to estab- ?The c u l t u r e i n w h i c h w e l i v e ? N o r t h

lish an all-boys academy next fall and introduce A m e r i c a n A n g l o p h o n e c u l t u r e ? i s a c u l t u r e that
300 ?boy-friendly? classrooms across the city. The t o d a y disrespects a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t f o r .
board, like many others across the country, already boys.? .
offers single-gender classrooms in some schools, Statistics show boys underachieve i n compari-
and there are s i m i l a r e x p e r i m e n t s being r u n at son to girls, are increasingly disengaged, and exhibit-
schools throughout Canada. more disruptive and violent behavior in school.
_,
While m a n y education experts a p p l a u d the There is little d i s p u t e that b o y s have f o r
idea as a way to ?let boys be boys,? some aca- years been underperforming g i r l s on standardized .
demics question the need f o r separate classes o r testing, particularly in literacy, b u t o p i n i o n a m o n g

Schools, saying boys don?t a c t u a l l y learn d i f f e r - researchers and experts is mixed over w h e t h e r the
t y than girls. Some blame the p u b l i c system solution lies in single-gender education.
o rneglecting to encourage b o y s to excel, particu- Arecent study by researchers a t t h e A m e r i c a n ?
ly in literacy skills. Others lay the blame o n a A s s o c i a t i o n of U n i v e r s i t y W o m e n E d u c a t i o n a l
m a e where academic achievement is f r o w n e d Foundation found that over the past decade, im-
n, provements in academic performance by girls have
98 Chapter « Establish Your Driving Values
?Isolating the classr

not been made at the expense of boys, who, on the
results,? he said. ?What e l a a l o n e d o e s n .
whole, have also made scholastic gains. : :
Yields Tesults sn tyi
?Single-sex schools do not confer an advan- room instruction. By putting boys § is the d a t
tage in terms o f student achievement for boys or got a g r o u p of learners w h oh a v e OBether, w o t
for girls,? said Charles Ungerleider, a sociology and similar learning S t y l e s . . .t h a t a m a rinter Ve
professor at the University of British Columbia and to program for boys and theirneedallow, tea, chee
former B.C. deputy minister of education, who has Catering specifically tob o . ;
i)
studied the performance of students in single-gen- needs is s o m e t h i n g that seems to han tetests ang
der versus co-educational schools. i n m a n y classrooms across the V e been |
: ;
cou Ost
He says the evidence is clear: ?When you U n i v e r s i t y o f A l b e r t a professoy He Ntry, Sayg
have carefully controlled comparisons of single- specialist in elementary education, ather Blair. a
sex and mixed-sex schooling, we find that girls and In an age when schools have bec ;
boys perform about the same.? sensitive to all things remotely violento r , mehyper.
But educators in schools experimenting w i t h offensive to anyone, boys, she says, lack f o e t a l
single-gender classes say, at least anecdotally, that agement to explore theiri n t e r e s t s ? w h i ENcour.
boys? attention spans are i m p r o v e d when they surround action-adventure, war, andfa n t a c t Often-
are segregated, partly because teachers can tailor ticularly when it comes to Treading and wr a e s ?
p r o g r a m m i n g to cater to similar interests that may ? I f boys are w a t c h i n g and reading 5 5

exist between boys, and because there are fewer and that?s w h a t they?re interested in, t h e r e s
distractions, i.e., girls. they w i l l w a n t to w r i t e about,? saidP r o f B
, lai wnat
Leanne Timko, principal of Calgary?s Sacred ?But we have [t]his questioning in teach ,
H e a r t School, w h i c h began offering single-sex minds, because there tends to be a lot of vi <s
: 1 lence
classes this September i n Kindergarten to Grade i n that stuff. There?s a whole bunch of censorship.
6, says w h i l e it?s too early to tell whether grades going on and we need to learn how to give boyst e
w i l l i m p r o v e in boys-only classes, teachers have o p p o r t u n i t y to w r i t e about w h a t they want? ;
noticed improved behavior. She also says she doesn?t believe acognitive:
C i t i n g research that suggests male students difference i n learning processes exists for boys and:
respond better to auditory instructions, she said girls, n o r does she t h i n k there is a crisis for boysin
the school has introduced sound systems in boys? education.
classrooms, where teachers wear microphones and One problem w i t h standardized tests is that-
their voices are amplified through speakers. Some they don?t measure literacy outside the traditional :
classrooms have also been rearranged to allow subjects of reading and w r i t i n g , she says. ;
more space for boys to move around. ?Boys are multiply-literate,? said Prof, Blair,}
?It?s been quite dramatic to see how their at- citing the results of a six-year study she recently?
tention has shifted,? Ms. T i m k o said, noting that completed that f o l l o w e d a g r o u p of Alberta boys}
parents have been enthusiastic about the changes. f r o m Grade 4 through .. . Grade 10. j
She adds, however, that single-gender edu- ?These boys took u p all kinds of digital lit!
cation isn?t the best o p t i o n for every student. eracies w a y before girls, In the long run, I actually;
?It's a program o f choice,? she said. ?We're think they?re w a y ahead o f the game. What we're
continuously learning about the differences between getting i n these standardized test scores isonly,
boys and girls. The goal of the segregated classroom part o f the picture.? 4
is the same goal as the coeducational classroom, and While talk within school boards of creating
that is to provide the best education for every kid.? single-gender options is newsmaking stuff inths)
Cecil B. Sterling Elementary Schoo! in the country, Canada is actually a latecomer tothe
H a m i l t o n - W e n t w o r t h District Schoo! Board has cussion, says Brad Adams, executivedirector
been offering single-sex classrooms from Grades 6 International Boys? School Coalition and fo
t h r o u g h 8 for eight years. Superintendent M a n n y head of the senior school at Upper Canada Coleg
Figueiredo says boys? engagement in classroom ac- The United States, New Zealand,A u s sue
tivities has improved, but it?s unclear if segregation United Kingdom and South Africa all hav
has led to better academic performance. cessful boys-only school models. 4
Chapter 5 ¢ Establish Your Driving Values 99
But many Canadian faculties of education, Dr. Sax, w h o is also the f o u n d e r o f the
ool boards and ministries tend to be dogmatically N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n f o r S i n g l e Sex P u b l i c
sed to single-gender education on the basis of
E d u c a t i o n i n the U.S., says c r i t i c s o f a l l - b o y s
tg
apparent inequity anda belief that the system
schools miss the point.
i i use differentiated teaching and learning, ?Single-sex education is not the objective, it?s
sho ?The argument is that if every child is
a means,? he said. ?The objective is to help e v e r y
would we segregate by something as
why
-41e,
child to achieve their full potential a c a d e m i c a l l y

u l y constructed as gender?? Mr. Adams said.
and intellectually.?
s o t He debates the common belief that co-ed Part of the rationale for public boards of-
schools provide a greater opportunity for boys fering single-sex education where teachers can
and girls to interact, and therefore more ?well create an alternative culture where ?it?s cool to
rounded? students. .
be smart,? he says, is that private all-boys or all-
?There are exceptions, but many co-ed schools
girls schools are too expensive for the average
are already and sometimes not so s u b t l y d i v i d e d b y family.
nder,? Mr. Adams said. ?Girls tend to dominate ?The argument isn?t about which option is
arts programs, take on more leadership positions, better. That?s the wrong question,? Dr. Sax said.
do more service, and populate the honor roles. For ?Children are diverse and parents ought to have
too many boys, it?s too easy to opt out, to be too cool a choice. Why not offer single-sex education as a
for school, to fall back on rigid stereotypes.? choice? It?s about social justice.?
Source: Material reprinted w i t h the express permission of: ?National Post Inc.?
Discussion Q u e s t i o n s
1. What do you t h i n k are the essential programs for these values? H o w w o u l d y o u k n o w i f y o u h a d
schools? Why? more or less of these values reflected i n policy?
2. What are the v a l u e s expressed i n t h i s n e w s 3. As a n education leader, w o u l d y o u s u p p o r t sin-
story? W h i c h c r i t e r i a w o u l d y o u d e r i v e f r o m gle-sex schools? Explain y o u r response.
Selected W e b s i t e s
Council of Chief State Schoo] Officers. Available at ful in terms of how this organization balances the
http:/twww.cesso.orgl. plethora of values and stances held b y its m e m b e r s
i n the recommendations that they provide.
The official website of the Council of C h i e f State
School Officers (CCSSO). The council is a nonpar-
National Association for Gifted Children. Available at
tisan, nationwide, nonprofit organization of p u b l i c
officials who head departments o f elementary and http:l/lwww.nage.orgl.
secondary education in the states, the District o f The official website of the National Association f o r
Columbia, the Department o f Defense Education Gifted C h i l d r e n (NAGC). Members include parents,
Activity, and five U.S. extra-state jurisdictions. The teachers, educators, other professionals, and com-
site contains a rich array of i n f o r m a t i o n o n educa- m u n i t y leaders. They p r o v i d e strong advocacy f o r
tional issues across the U n i t e d States. The CCSSO is the establishment and support of gifted and talented
committed to p r o v i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n to state educa- programs in schools. Education leaders m a y find
tion leaders that address their ability to improve the this site helpful for the information it p r o v i d e s about
Performance of their education system, Because the gifted and talented education across the c o u n t r y a n d
council seeks consensus o n ma j o r education issues, summarized i n its annual report: State of the States in
education leaders w i l l find the site particularly use- Gifted Education. Leaders o f this organization express
100 Chapter5 ¢ Establish Your Driving Values
a definite viewpoint on the value of gifted and tal- The NCEE is strongly committ,
ented programs in schools and often hold contrast- tional and intellectual support 4, to Provig: 1
ing views from that held by members of the National work for the transformation of an Weators 8 Mio,
Coalition for Equity i n Education (listed next). Members of this 8roup often off Ucational sens!
*T Stronof wigs
gifted and talented proBTAMS because
National Coalition for Equity in Education. to dicen: «itis:
Available at tial to discriminate against stude © Of they, tof
leged communities, Equity is a ses froml e Pot,

http:/Incee.education.ucsb.edulaboutus.htm.
and underlies many of thePolicy n e l
The official website of the National Coalition for made by members of this group. E a , men,
Equity in Education (NCEE). The coalition consists
may find this site interesting for the a t o leag
of early childhood through university educators and
perspective it provides on what asu Oration ang
supports the achievement of equity in education. tion system looks like. ?CeSSFul e d s
S e l e c t e d References
A l e x a n d e r , N . A . (2002). Race, p o v e r t y , a n d t h e s t u -
the insight i t provides on conducting a co
d e n t c u r r i c u l u m : I m p l i c a t i o n s for standards policy.
sive cost analysis of education Programs me
A m e r i c a n E d u c a t i o n a l Research J o u r n a l , 39(3),
specific information it offers o n the relative fe
675-694.
of Robert Slavin?s Success for A l lSchools H e e
This article examines the links between the m i n o r i t y Levin?s Accelerated Schools, and James Come ,
and poverty status of public secondary schools and School Development Program. rs
course-taking patterns within those schools. The find-
O d d e n , A . , & Picus, L. (2008). Schoolfinance:
ings have mixed implications for the effectiveness A p o l i c y perspective (4th ed.), Madison, WE
and equity of standards-based policies. Curriculum McGraw Hill.
standards were associated w i t h higher student partic-
ipation in core and advanced courses. However, links Odden and Picus provide an excellent toadmapof the
between course-taking patterns and the minority and issues that underlie school finance in the United States,
Their text offers a strong theoretical underpinning for
poverty status of schools persisted i n big-city school
districts but were somewhat weaker for schools in many of the values that shape education finance dir
the rest of N e w York State. School size played an cussions, including equity, efficiency, and adequacy.
Education leaders m a y find Chapters 1 through 4
increasingly important role o n course taking for
especially helpful for the overview providedo nschool
schools in all locations. Education leaders may find
finance, legal parameters, and equity considerationsas
this article interesting for the information it presents
they apply to the financing of schools.
o n the trade-offs that sometimes exist between pursu-
ing more effective versus more equitable policies. O k u n , A. M . (1975). E q u a l i t y and efficiency, the
big tradeoff. Washington, DC: The Brookings
K i n g , J. A. (1994). M e e t i n g the educational needs Institution.
o f a t - r i s k students: A cost analysis o f three mod-
This is a classical treatise o f the presumed trade-off
els. E d u c a t i o n a l E v a l u a t i o n and P o l i c y Analysis,
between h a v i n g policies that result in greater ef
16, 1-19.
ficiencies and policies that result in greater equity.
This article provides cost comparisons of three com- Education leaders m a y f i n d this book interesting
prehensive models for bringing at-risk students to because of the excellent overview itp rovides
grade level d u r i n g their elementary school years, garding these values that often undergird poucy
Education leaders may find this article valuable for discourse.
Develop Alternatives
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After reading t h i s chapter, y o u w i l l be able to:
a Identify generic strategies o f p o l i c y intervention
« Modify existing solutions to broaden the alternatives available
« Identify major p o l i c y types
s Distinguish among p o l i c y mechanisms and describe best-practice contexts
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
You are the superintendent of a struggling school district. Overall enrollment is declining,
but the proportions o f students who are eligible for free and reduced lunch a n d those who
speak English as a second language are increasing. The state In which you are located is
experiencing a fiscal crisis a n d has cut its budget drastically, including the amounts ex-
pended on schools a n d for special programs. You are faced with a large b u d g e t deficit,
and you are examining different policy options to increase the budget without adversely af-
fecting community morale and student achievement. The prospect o f closing schools, cut-
ting specialist classes like music, consolidating programs, or undergoing a state takeover
of some schools are unpalatable, b u t you know that you cannot continue as you have. You
brace yourself to face the school board and members o f the community as they clamor to
hear your ideas,
What do you say?
101
102 Chapter6 * Develop Alternatives
W H A T ARE ALTERNATIVES?
Alternatives are the policy options that you are considering to Tesolve
describe the interventions you are taking into account to resolve ora l l s PrOblemya,
tive condition that you identified. The process of developing alternat i v e a the ne!
Duke (2004) characterizes as the design phase of the educational chan . Parallels ee
?involves what needs to change i n order to address identifiede d u c a t i o n s o s vi
More specifically, Duke, Bradley, Butin, Grogan, and Gillespie (1998) dei n e s ? tp o
design as ?the process of creating the means b y w h i c h educationali n t e e e
achieved within a specified context? (p. 159). Sntions can be
Alternatives Are Not Outcomes
A l t e r n a t i v e s are n o t to be c o n f u s e d w i t h the o u t c o m e s s o u g h t a n d are alw.

to an end; they are n o t an end i n and of themselves. Alternatives aret h e a
the analytical process; they detail how you plan to mitigate the negativec o n d e ?
you have identified as a policy issue. When creating alternatives, you are detion i
a particular action or package of actions that w i l l help to address theproblem P
erature observes that we are often wedded to a particular w a y of doing thingsThe i,
often lose sight of what we would like to accomplish w i t h our efforts (eg,,
D n ? top
Bardach, 2009). :
2004, +
A l t e r n a t i v e s A r e N o t I m p l e m e n t a t i o n Plans
Creating alternatives are not the same as developing an implementation plan (the su
ject of Chapter 10). Rather, you are creating a grounded wish list of strategies that yoy
w o u l d like to pursue to change the status quo. As noted b y Duke (2004), while You must
be aware of the factors that may constrain implementation of a policy, those factors are
not the essence of policy design. The essence of constructing an alternative is determin.
ing how it addresses key links in the causal chain of factors leading to the problem.
Basic A l t e r n a t i v e s a n d Their V a r i a n t s
Bardach (2009) suggests that it is important to tell the difference betweena basic altem>
tive and its variants. Basic alternatives may differ from each other because of differences
i n the items that they address. For example, several factors have an impact on student
achievement, including teacher quality, governance, peer groupings, curricula, and st:
dent ability. When developing alternatives, you m a y decide that you w i l l focus on teacher
quality or time spent i n school. The actions chosen to mitigate the negative impact or ac
centuate positive effects of various underlying factors are the basic alternatives.
Variants of a particular option emerge because of the different methods of imple
mentation and financing that they require. For example, if you createalternatives that
address teacher quality, you may decide to provide incentives for school districts©
have highly qualified teachers, or you m a y mandate that they have qualified teaches.
You may choose to finance the proposed policy by reallocating current resources, mn
vesting additional amounts, or a combination of both. unl

Duke (2004) notes f o u r bases for differentiating alternatives: purpose,ine ie
o f change, the nature of change, and the magnitude of change. Purpose refers te
goal of intervention. For example, is the i n t e r v e n t i o n p r i m a r i l y meant to inc
103
Chapter 6 ¢ Develop Alternatives
aceountability, improve children outcomes, or reduce costs? The unit of change refers
to the individual, group, or organization that you w i l l target to effect change. For ex-
ample, w i l l the proposed action target the behavior of students, teachers, the school
community as aw h o l e , o r t h e state? The nature of change refers to the type of change
that you propose. That is, is the alternative going to alter the production process,
change the outputs produced by the system, change the governance structure, o r
e the attitudes and behavior of individuals? The magnitude of change indicates
whether the alternative is designed to m o d i f y the entire system, as in systemic re-
form, or to affect a small part of it, as in a p i l o t program.
DEVELOPING A L T E R N A T I V E S B Y M O D E L I N G THE S Y S T E M
Bardach (2009) suggests that in creating alternatives, you should consider the appro-
priate metaphor for modeling the system that you would like to change. He offers
three important metaphors: market models, production processes, and evolutionary
systems. Market models replicate relationships in a market. Production models rep-
licate the creation of outputs. Evolutionary models replicate the gradual changes that
occur over time in a system. Each of these three metaphors is discussed more com-
pletely in the next section of this chapter. The utility of models is the insight that they
provide about the nature of the relationships among key variables w i t h i n the system.
By discerning the nature of relationships, you can change them in a w a y that produces
outcomes you find more favorable than the present condition.
The M e t a p h o r o f t h e M a r k e t
The metaphor of the market presumes that individuals are self-interested and that out-
comes can be improved through competition. Leading policymakers have used it fre-
quently since the 1980s. Because of the nature of the competitive relationship presumed
by this metaphor, policymakers who share this viewpoint rely heavily on alternatives
that use market mechanisms, including the increased use of alternatives that increase
choice (e.g., charter schools, vouchers) and affect price (e.g., incentives). Diane Ravitch,
anoted researcher, educator, and former proponent of this perspective, has increas-
ingly criticized the validity of the parallels made between school systems and markets
(Ravitch, 2010).
The P r o d u c t i o n M e t a p h o r
The production metaphor equates school systems w i t h a production process where
inputs, throughputs, and outputs are related. M a n y scholars in school finance
have adopted this approach (e.g., Monk, 1989) and have developed various educa-
tion production functions. They view alternatives in terms of how they influence
the production process of schooling. They identify the various ingredients that go
into the ?production? of an educated child, often measured as student achievement.
Researchers conduct analyses of the impact on outcomes of changing the nature of
one or more key schooling ingredients through policy actions. A n example o f a ques-
i o n answered by this type of analysis is, What are the implications of mandating
uigher curriculum standards, thereby increasing the ?quality? of an important i n p u t
Alexander, 2004)?
104 C h a p t e6r ©
Evolutionary Models
E v o l u t i o n a r y m o d e l s recognize the changes t h a t o c c u r o v e r t i m e w i t h i n a syste
P o l i c y m a k e r s w h o use t h i sm e t a p h o r tend to create alternatives t h a t addresg com
m o n processes w i t h i n a system t h a t i n t u r n affect ? v a r i a t i o n a m o n g competitors en "
l e c t i o n a n d retention? (Bardach, 2009, p. 19). For example, i f an educational system,
p r o d u c e d too m a n y l o w - p e r f o r m i n g graduates, p o l i c y m a k e r s m a y decide to infly-
ence the ? n a t u r a l ? results p r o d u c e d b y the s y s t e m b y e d u c a t i n g actors w i t h i n th
s y s t e m o f the t y p e of outcomes preferred. The use o f r a t i n g systems, where schools
t h a t m a k e y e a r l y progress are considered to be b e t t e r t h a n schools that do Not, are
reflective o f this approach. Bardach refers to this as a change i n the p o o l of competi-
tors. Y o u m a y also choose to influence the processes t h a t r e s u l t i n the Production
of these graduates so that there is better selection b e t w e e n the types of graduates
sought a n d the schooling processes that are r e w a r d e d . The I n v e s t i n g i n Innovation
(i3) f e d e r a l grant, w h i c h targets i n n o v a t i v e a n d effective practices w i t h i n schools, is
reflective o f this approach. Bardach refers to this as a change i n the ?selection mecha-
n i s m . ? Y o u m a y also choose to change the nature of t h e system so that you reduce
the p r o p e n s i t y o f i n s t i t u t i o n s to p r o d u c e l o w - p e r f o r m i n g graduates. The transforma-
tive m o d e l s e m b e d d e d i n recent federal rules t h a t call f o r the closing of underper.
f o r m i n g schools are reflective o f this approach. Bardach refers to this as changing the
? r e t e n t i o n mechanism.?
Doing Nothing Different
When developingal i s t of alternatives, many researchers advocate including the op-

tion of doing nothing different from before (e.g., Bardach, 2009; Patton & Sawicki,
1993). However, doing nothing different is unlikely to lead to change unless the
environment is changing around you. Given environmental constraints, more ef-
fective options may not be immediately viable. For example, tying teacher pay to
values added in student achievement is increasingly popular i n inner policy circles.
Research suggests, however, that because of potentially large measurement errors in
student data, student achievement should not be the sole criterion for determining
teacher pay. The rest of this section discusses the source of alternatives and closes
w i t h the various policy types and mechanisms that may be employed to implement
a particular strategy.
H O W D O YOU GENERATE A L T E R N A T I V E S ?
W h e n d e v e l o p i n g alternatives, you m u s t start first w i t h the p r o b l e m and the goal of
addressing it. By this stage, you s h o u l d have an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the values,goals,
a n d objectives of key stakeholders. Second, create a conceptual g r a p h that illustrates
the u n d e r l y i n g interaction of factors that have led to the creation of the problem that
y o u describe. As noted b y D u k e (2004), ?[s]uccessful designs [of alternatives] foredu-
cational change result f r o m systematic t h i n k i n g ? f r o m an appreciation of the inter
relationships between and a m o n g design elements a n d those w h o w o r k and learn 18
schools? (p. 117).
C h a p t e6r ¢ Develop Alternatives 105
» Do you have a clear statement of the problem?
» Do you have an understanding of the values, goals, and objectives of key stakeholders?
Have you created a conceptual graph detailing relationships between the problem and associated variables?
« Do your alternatives reflect the underlying factors of your problem?
FIGURE 6.1 Guiding Questions for Generating Alternatives
Sources o fA l t e r n a t i v e s
Alternatives are the specific tasks undertaken to address the identified causes of t h e
roblem. To get an i d e a o f the a p p r o p r i a t e tasks t h a t you should consider, y o u can
go to several sources. First, y o u can r e v i e w the literature to examine and e x p l o r e re-
search findings t h a t present a s i m i l a r context to y o u r own. E x a m i n i n g the l i t e r a t u r e
may give you ideas about w h a t y o u can change realistically and w h a t is o u t o f y o u r
hands. Second, y o u can examine the experiences of others w i t h related problems. For
example, the M i n n e a p o l i s p u b l i c schools sent a contingency of its leaders to C h i c a g o
and other cities to examine k e y r e f o r m initiatives. This led to the recommendations b y
the superintendent to (1) create a p o r t f o l i o o f autonomous school models, (2) create an
Office of N e w Schools to seek o u t and manage the authorization of such schools, a n d
(3) collaborate w i t h h i g h - q u a l i t y t h i r d - p a r t y school providers.
Additional sources of alternatives include the insight of experts and your legal
obligations (e.g., Patton & Sawicki, 1993). When relying on the expertise of others, you
can modify general guidelines, or you can customize alternatives to fit your localized
problem. Because of the difficulties stemming from the creation of new solutions, Duke
(2004, p. 93) notes that ?many educators prefer to adopt or adapt existing designs rather
than to create anew design? (emphasis in original).
GENERIC ALTERNATIVES. A s y o u t h i n k about the variety of issues t h a t are faced b y

policymakers a n d a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , y o u w i l l f i n d that m a n y of the changes discussed
are often reworkings of an old solution. W e i m e r and V i n i n g (1992) indicate that y o u r
search for alternatives m a y lead y o u to existing policy proposals. For example, Promise
Neighborhoods is a federal p r o g r a m that is modeled on the H a r l e m Children?s Z o n e
(HCZ). The H C Z was developed b y a community-based organization and offers stu-
dents comprehensive services, such as preschool and college counseling, to foster h i g h
student achievement.
You may also recognize a solution in generic policy strategies. For example, if you
want to increase the quantity demanded of a good or service, economic analysis suggests
* Look to the literature.
* Look to the experience of others with related problems (professional judgment).
* Look
to the Insight of experts.
* Look to your legal obligations.
Fi
GURE 6.2 Sources o f A l t e r n a t i v e s
106 Chapter6 ©
that y o u must find a w a y to reduce its price. Governmental units can

8eneral],
price of a good or service throught h e use of taxes or subsidies. Other generic.alter the
include changing the standards required (¢.g,, t h r o u g h the use of regulation a Strategie
of information) and changing power structures (e.g,, t h r o u g h the structurin, Provision
rights) (e.g., Bardach, 2009). 8 0 Private
CUSTOMIZING POLICY INTERVENTIONS. A c c o r d i n g t o O s b o r n (as Cited i n

S a w i c k i , 1993), y o u can create the n e w o u t o f t h e o l d i n s e v e r a l w a y s . Y o u ¢sctton
t h e d e s i g n o f a n e x i s t i n g p o l i c y so t h a t i t w i l l h a v e a b i g g e r i m p a c t b y incr Adapt
i t s scale ( m a g n i f y ) . F o r e x a m p l e , m a n ya n t i b u l l y i n g p r o g r a m s w e r e i m p e m a
i n i t i a l l y at the school level and expanded into statewide and nationalzero-tole ®t
policies. Tance
Y o u can m o d i f y a policy design so that it operates on a smaller scale (minj AR
example, the 1997 federal Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration shared or

same purpose as transforming school programs of the 2009 AmericanRecovery the
Reinvestment Act (ARRA). The 2009 program calls f o r f o u r reform models toimprove
failing schools: (1) turnaround, (2) restart, (3) school closures, and (4) transformation
The earlier policy spread its resources across 7,000 l o w - p e r f o r m i n g schools, while the
A A R A targets the 5,000 lowest performing schools.
You can transform a policy by substituting one level o f decision making with an.
other. Some district leaders have transformed the relationship betweenmanagement
and teachers since gaining the authority to ?transform? schools under provisions of the
N o C h i l d Left Behind Act. For example, a Central Falls, Rhode Island, superintendent's
proposal to fire all the teachers in a failing h i g h school after contract talks broke down
was approved by the board members of that district (Zezima, 2010). The dismissal of
the faculty members represents a transformation of the relationship between manage-
ment and teachers for two key reasons. First, the f i r i n g of teachers w o u l d normally fall
on b u i l d i n g leaders, not district leaders. Second, the f i r i n g o f the entire faculty and the
imposition of mandatory professional development according to federal guidelines re-
flect more state and federal involvement in district governance than is typical for school
districts in the United States.
Y o u c o u l d also adjust the i n i t i a l p o l i c y design to c o m b i n e decision-making
a u t h o r i t y as w e l l as rearrange the responsibilities of selected implementers. In
Tennessee, f o r example, districts, along w i t h other educational organizations (e.g.
Teach f o r America), can license teachers. Teacher licensing used to be the sole put
v i e w o f the state. Another example is Illinois, where state officials approved a policy
that outside organizations must partner w i t h districts i n efforts to turn around low:
p e r f o r m i n g schools. ;
T o determine the appropriate modifications, y o u m u s t focus on t h e loca

in w h i c h you w o u l d like the change to occur. Consider h o w y o u w o u l d finance that
change and be aware of the current financing of policies supporting the condition lea
you w o u l d like to change. To generate reasonable p o l i c y options, y o u mustbe ¢
about the decision sites and points of influence, and be m i n d f u l of h o w to manage ag
There is abundant research to help ground y o u r approach (e.g., Weimer & Vin
1992). The remaining discussion relies extensively on Lowi?s (1964) se on : jon
policy types and McDonnell and Elmore?s (1987) and McDonnell?s (1994)discussio?
p o l i c y mechanisms.
Chapter
6 * Develop Alternatives 107
want the c hange to occur? Are there Sxisting policies that addresses similar conditions?
existi i
ere do you
. Wet modifications will cause existing proposals to be better aligned with the current context?
+ How do you plan to finance the change that you propose?
» How are current policies dealing with similar problems financed?

+ Who gets to make key decisions under your new plan? Are these the same individuals who were key decision
makers under the old policy? Will the modifications you propose make the plan more or less popular with
influential stakeholders?
FIGURE 6.3 Guiding Questions t o Consider When Modifying Alternatives
p o L i c y TYPES
Lowi (1964) argues that p o l i c y options can be categorized into three m a i n p o l i c y types:
distributive, redistributive, a n d regulatory. D i s t r i b u t i v e policies entail presenting ad-
ditional resources to a c o m m u n i t y o r g r o u p for w h o m the p r o b l e m is being solved.
Redistributive p o l i c i e s entail t a k i n g from one subgroup w i t h i n the c o m m u n i t y and
giving it to another subgroup. R e g u l a t o r y policies require specified actions or results
that may or m a y n o t i n v o l v e the explicit allocation of resources.
Distributive policies are the least likely to face political opposition and tend to be
the most costly kinds of actions, other things being equal. Redistributive policies are
the most likely to face political opposition. However, they m a y n o t require additional
resources and thus m a y n o t i n c u r as m u c h additional costs as d i s t r i b u t i v e policies.
Regulatory policies f a l l somewhere between distributive and redistributive policies i n
terms of their expected i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r adoption, implementation, and costs. These
policy types m a y be b r o k e n d o w n f u r t h e r into policy mechanisms, w h i c h are thes p e -
cific levers that policymakers a n d practitioners employ to get things done.
POLICY M E C H A N I S M S A N D BEST-PRACTICE CONTEXT
McDonnell and Elmore (1987) and McDonnell (1994) indicate five key policy instru-
ments or mechanisms: inducements, capacity-building policy, system change, man-
dates, and hortatory policy.
Distributive Redistributive
C a p a c i t y bullding
inducements System change
Hortatory
FGURE 6.4 Relationship Among Policy Types and Instruments

108 C h a p t e6r ¢ Develop Alternatives
Inducements
I n d u c e m e n t s are short-term transfers of resources and are best used when di

h a v i o r is acceptable. Because these instruments are d i s t r i b u t i v e i nn a t u r e , t h e y be.
l i k e l y to meet political resistance, and policymakers m a y use this approach to 2 are lag,
n e w programs. A concern w i t h reliance on inducements stems from the fact nee Uce
m u n i t i e s that have relatively more resources are often i n a better Position tgr e .
the demands of this policy instrument. While inducements are n o t necesgari} SPOnd to
tive, educational units do n o t automatically receive f u n d i n g w i t h thism e , Comper.

they w o u l d t h r o u g h traditional school f u n d i n g formulas. That is, w i t h i n duc TM, ag
dollars f o l l o w behavior and o u t p u t rather than being automatically awarded t o a
ernmental units based on enrollment, p o v e r t y levels, and so on. Thus, communit; Bov-
are already d o i n g w e l l on the measure sought (e.g., h i g h e r student achievementthat
m o r e likely to be rewarded than those communities that are n o t doing well, H o w are
m a n y leaders of programs that have l o w s t u d e n t p e r f o r m a n c e argue that the &ver,
more, n o t less, resources to turn around the poor results i n theirsetting.T h e y a s s ,t h e
giving more resources to education units that are already d o i n g well, andh o l d i n g batt
f u n d i n g f r o m those that are not, serves to accentuate inequities among Btoups. F oex r
ample, leaders o f rural districts and urban programs w i t h t i g h t budgets andrelatively
l o w student performance often express concern that they are disadvantaged byfundin,
programs that distribute dollars through inducements rather than through formulas 8
Examples of inducements include the federal Race to the Top grant wherefinan.
cial incentives are p r o v i d e d to states i f they pursue p a r t i c u l a r educational Programs
and innovative ideas encouraged by the U.S. D e p a r t m e n t of Education. A nexample
of inducements at the state level is Q-Comp, a teacher-pay incentive program funded
by the state of Minnesota. The program rewards school districts that include student
achievement i n their criteria determining pay f o r teachers.
C a p a c i t y - B u i l d i n g Policies
C a p a c i t y - b u i l d i n g policies are long-term investments i n the material, intellectual, or

h u m a n resources of an organization. Capacity b u i l d i n g is best used w h e n existing insti-
tutions are unable to produce a desired policy outcome. These policies are distributive
in nature and are unlikely to have strong resistance to their implementation. However,
they tend to be expensive and the returns on that i n v e s t m e n t are n o t evident in the
short term. Capacity building m a y be an especially d i f f i c u l t i n s t r u m e n t for policymak-
ers to e m p l o y w h e n budgets are t i g h t because more obvious and immediate needs may
take precedence. A n example of capacity-building policies include investment in the
professional development of teachers. Research suggests that, f o r this investment tobe
w o r t h w h i l e , professional development should be o n g o i n g rather than a one-time oc
currence. Professional development initiatives that require m o r e sustained effort also
tend to be more expensive f o r a variety of reasons. For instance, teachersw o u l dhave to
spend m o r e time outside the classroom to attend these educational sessions,potentially
i n c u r r i n g the cost of h i r i n g substitutes. A n exception is a unique program model
i n a small public h i g h school in N e w Y o r k State where professional development is e n
bedded i n the scheduling (Sawchuk, 2010a). .
M a n y professional development programs are designed as an inducement forn e

d i v i d u a l teachers i n the form o f c o n t i n u i n g education units. I t isp o s s i b l e that the
Chapter 6 * Develop A l t e r n a t i v e s 109
could be mandated, and thus teachers would be required to attend specific

ams
rogt
essions-
This type ofm a n d a t e is similar to the requirement in many states that teachers
nave a M aster?s degree in order to be tenured.
system C h a n g e P o l i c i e s
systemchangepolicies lead to a transfer ofdecision-making power and authority to

different elements int h e system. They are best adopted when existing institutions or
other agentsare unwilling to respond to demands for change. Because these instruments
esult in redistributing resources (including power), they are often politically difficult
to adopt and implement. This approach presumes that, by simply shifting responsibil-
ity for carrying out change to someoneelse, change will occur. Portions of the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001 reflect this strategy, where families are given the option to at-
tend another public school (at the previous school?s expense) if the school their child
currently attends is consistently deemedaf a i l i n g school. The underlying notion is that
this transfer of authority acts as an incentive to educators to do better if they face the
possibility of losing students and the revenue that theyb r i n g .
Mandates
Mandates are policies w i t h language r e q u i r i n g compliance and m e t i n g o u t p u n i s h -

ment if that c o m p l i a n c e is n o t met. T h i s strategy is best u t i l i z e d if there is s t r o n g so-
cietal support for the p o l i c y , a n d its goals and u n i f o r m behaviors are desirable to t h e
broader population. M a n d a t e s are favored b y policymakers because t h e costs o f this
strategy fall largely o n i m p l e m e n t e r s . I n fact, cost m a y n o t be f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d i n the
creation and a d o p t i o n of alternatives. A consistent c o m p l a i n t b y m a n y e d u c a t i o n a l
leaders is that p o l i c y m a k e r s on h i g h e r r u n g s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l a d d e r r e q u i r e
them to complete tasks b u t do n o t p r o v i d e f u n d i n g to cover the costs. P r o v i d i n g a
free and appropriate p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n f o r students w i t h disabilities, as r e q u i r e d b y
the Individuals w i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s E d u c a t i o n Act, is often cited as an e x a m p l e of an
unfunded mandate. Nonetheless, the U n i t e d States District C o u r t i n M i l l s v. Board
of Education has asserted t h a t e x c l u d i n g c h i l d r e n w i t h disabilities w h i l e p r o v i d i n g
able-bodied c h i l d r e n w i t h p u b l i c education denies equal p r o t e c t i o n . The c o u r t has
long ruled that cost is n o t a j u s t i f i a b l e reason for d e n y i n g an e d u c a t i o n to c h i l d r e n
with disabilities.
Hortatory P o l i c i e s
Hortatory policies are comprised of information and symbols that appeal to the values
of members of the system. These types of policy options are best employed when the
populations targeted are most likely to act on the information received. Common exam-
Ples of hortatory policies at the elementary and secondary school levels are the posters
in school hallways extolling the virtue of school pride and detailing the behavior that is
expected of students. Another popular hortatory campaign is in response to the rising
credit card debt owed by college students. On the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
campus, for example, posters tell students that they should live like students now so
that they will not have to do so later.
__
{Wdeally, policy packages should contain policy actions that employ diverse mecha-
nisms. Fowler (2009) suggests that an alternative is more likely to be effective if it mixes
110 C h a p t e6r « Develop Alternatives
1. How do the options identified coexist or conflict with your notions of schooling?
2. How do the options identified address the underlying causes of the policy issue?
3. What are the implications for the options identified on the success of children?
4. Are you considering a policy change simply to keep up with the rest of the educational community?
5. Will the changes have an impact on the production process, governance structure, educational Outputs, o,
individual behaviors?
6. Who will be responsible for overseeing the change in action in your proposed alternative?
7. How does the proposed funding differ from the status quo?
8 . Will the options you consider standardize outcomes?
9. Will the options you consider promote flexibility for implementers?
FIGURE 6 . 5 Questions t o Consider As Y o u D e v e l o p Policy A l t e r n a t i v e s
and matches different policy levers so that there is a diverse portfolio. Diversity helps _
to balance the strengths and weaknesses of the policy instruments being considered. ?
A s y o u generate a n d c o n t e m p l a t e v a r i o u s p o l i c y o p t i o n s , t h i n k about how

t h e y coexist o r c o n f l i c t w i t h y o u r notions of s c h o o l i n g a n d t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r the -
success o f c h i l d r e n . A r e y o u c o n s i d e r i n g change s i m p l y to k e e p u p w i t h the rest
o f t h e e d u c a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y ? W i l l the changes y o u p r o p o s e generate r e f o r m or
p o l i c y c h u r n ? (Policy churn occurs w h e n there is m o r e s y m b o l i c a c t i v i t y t h a n there ;
is s u b s t a n t i v e change.) W i l l the changes have an i m p a c t o n i n s t i t u t i o n s o r families,
o r both? W h a t influence is the p o l i c y designed to h a v e on g o v e r n a n c e , production,
o u t p u t s , o r i n d i v i d u a l s ? W h o w i l l be responsible f o r o v e r s e e i n g this change? W i l l the
o p t i o n s y o u consider balance the need to h a v e established o u t c o m e s w i t h the flex-
i b i l i t y of r e a c h i n g them? These are key questions to c o n s i d e r as y o u generate various
alternatives.
piney e
ae r e R E T
a t
Chapter Summary
T h i s c h a p t e r c o v e r e d the d i f f e r e n t strategies w i t h the context that you face. From the onset,
t h a t y o u can e m p l o y to create change. You can you should think about the impact on key pop
s t a r t f r o m scratch o r r e i n v e n t the old, m a k i n g - ulations if the p o l i c y y o u propose does n o t wor
i t s o m e t h i n g n e w . W h e n d e v e l o p i n g alterna- in the way that you imagine. b
tives, y o u are i d e n t i f y i n g tasks t h a t y o u t h i n k Resources are scarce, so you w i l l not Dé
w i l l c h a n g e the status quo. Change can be d i f f i - able to do everything that you want. Once yer
c u l t , h o w e v e r , a n d it w i l l cost y o u time, money, have found a reasonable set of options, yo"
g o o d w i l l , a n d so on. Change can create a sense must choose among them so that you can ons
o f i n s t a b i l i t y , l a c k of reliability, a n d vulnerabil- ommend which action or package of acto u
w i l l allow you to balance the criteria that y?
i t y a m o n g stakeholders. A s part of that change,
y o u need to c o n s i d e r the merits o f doing some- care about. Weighing and choosingamong | is
alternatives is the next step i n the process an
t h i n g d i f f e r e n t a n d ensure t h a t it is compatible
the focus of Chapter 7.
Chapter 6 * Develop Alternatives 111
geview Q u e s t i o n s
What are some of the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v o l v e d i n 3. Create a conceptual graph of a problematic

* changing the status quo? condition. Based on the relationships that
As you consider the v a r i e t y o f issues faced you identify, generate a short list of alter-
2. by p o l i c y m a k e r s a n d a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , y o u natives. Indicate the policy mechanism that
will find that m a n y o f the changes discussed you would choose in your policy design.
are often r e w o r k i n g s of an o l d solution. Providea rationale for your response.
Identify key policy alternatives recently p r o - .
Reread the chapter-opening education v i -
osed by state, district, o r local p o l i c y m a k - gnette. Has your response changed after
ers. Using the discussion i n this chapter on reading this chapter? If yes, h o w has it
refining policy alternatives, i d e n t i f y an older changed? If no, h o w does your initial re-
policy option that s p a w n e d the m o r e recent sponse reflect the chapter themes?
proposal. Indicate w h a t m o d i f i c a t i o n s w e r e
done i n the most recent enactment.

?How do y o u p u t a price o n learning? P a y i n g do, school work, and . . . 1 knew school was going
students for performance is a controversial idea.? to benefit me later on in life. I f the school has the
National Post ( £ / k / a The Financial Post) (Canada). money, they should use it to fix up the schools or
November 20, 2010 S a t u r d a y . T o r o n t o Edition. get another teacher in there.?
BYLINE: K e n y o n Wallace a n d V i n c e n t M c D e r m o t t , Judging from the public outcry, it?s a senti-
National Post. S E C T I O N : T O R O N T O ; Pg. A19. ment shared by many north of the border, where
LENGTH: 1367 w o r d s this week Toronto District School Board education
As a r g u m e n t s b e t w e e n teenage g i r l s and director Chris Spence suggested via Twitter that
their fathers go, this one is unusual. the board?s new anti-poverty task force consider a
Fifteen-year-old Samantha Ivory, a Grade 10 similar program.
student at Cass Technical High School in Detroit, ?Should we pay k i d s i n o u r m o r e disadvan-
Mich., thinks she should be paid to go to school taged communities to d o w e l l i n school? Perhaps,
and get good grades. as part of a p o v e r t y - r e d u c t i o n scheme?? he w r o t e .
She already does well but says cash rewards The proposal initiated a flurry of media cover-
for good attendance and better test scores?currently age, lit up talk-radio phone lines, and even rattled
a new statewide ?pay-for-performance?
_the subject o f the higher echelons of government when Ontario
bill?would improve her motivation and that o f her Education Minister Leona Dombrowsky told the
peers to stay i n school. Besides, she could use the legislature her government doesn?t support the idea.
money for college, ?The problem we're trying to solve is we have
?If students get paid, d r o p o u t rates w i l l be more of our marginalized students who are not per-
lower. It would make others do better in schoo! by forming well in school,? Mr. Spence said in an inter-
giving them a reward,? Samantha said from the view with the National Post. ?Let's think about this a
east-side Detroit home she shares with her parents little differently: What might help these kids ensure
and four siblings. that they do their homework, ensure that they come
_.
_ But for Samuel Ivory, Samantha?s father, the to school and be more engaged in their school? Let?s
idea of his daughter making money for doing what think outside the box fora moment... . Maybe some
every North American child should be doing any- kind of incentive system is going to help them.?
Way doesn?t sit well. While Mr. Spence?s idea might have offended
?It?s kinda like a Catch-22,? he said. ?When I some Canadian sensibilities, school boards across
_Went to school, it was something I had a desire to the United States have been experimenting w i t h
112 C h a p t e r 6 * D e v e l o p Alternatives
don?t s h o w t h e m s o m e t h i n g they w a n t
the idea for years, offering students anything from they Won't°
w o r k h a r d to get it.? ?
cars, D V D players, iPods and trips to Disneyland

for perfect attendance records and improved test Researchers at HarvardUniversity r
scores, completed a two-year study in which the n y
I n Chicago, students w i t h perfect attendance $6.3 million to 38,000 students in 261schoole, Paid
are r e w a r d e d w i t h t r i p s to the circus. O n e h i g h four cities to see if monetary incentives hag ACToss
pact on performance. any im.
school w o n a concert b y Kanye West for s h o w i n g
the greatest attendance i m p r o v e m e n t . What they found was intriguing.
dents were rewarded for better attendarce beh
A f e w years ago, a s t u d e n t at O l d h a m C o u n t y
and for reading more books?elementscharaVior
H i g h School i n Buckner, Ky., w a s reportedly given
a y e l l o w F o r d M u s t a n g for g o o d attendance a n d ized as educational ?inputs? by the researcher?
behavior. academic performance improved. But when a$5
O n e school i n W a s h i n g t o n , D.C., p a i d a stu- incentive was offered simply for better exam oy ee
scores?educational ?outputs??students did not
d e n t m o r e t h a n $1,000 for the same thing.
The incentives look good on paper, but they perform better.
have h a d v a r y i n g degrees of success. Researchers suggested this was because sty.
/ I n 2004, Chelsea H i g h School i n Chelsea, dents, as much as they wanted to get better grades
M a s s . , i n t r o d u c e d a cash i n c e n t i v e p r o g r a m to and therefore more money, didn?t know what jt
s t u d e n t s to c o m b a t p o o r attendance. The school would take to improve their performance.
p r o m i s e d to d e p o s i t $25 into the b a n k account o f ?In order to improve the output, you have to
e v e r y s t u d e n t w h o h a d perfect attendance d u r i n g make the assumption that children already know
each school term. A s t u d e n t w o u l d get an extra $25 h o w to learn. They don?t,? said Thelma Morris-
b o n u s b y a c h i e v i n g p e r f e c t attendance f o r a n en- Lindsey, executive director of the Dallas, Tex.-
tire year, m e a n i n g one could potentially w a l k a w a y based foundation Earning b y Learning, which
w i t h $400. commissioned the Harvard study.
A b o u t 80% of students at Chelsea H i g h For the past 15 years, Earning by Learning
School live below the poverty line. has been encouraging elementary and high school
?Some students t h o u g h t i t w a s patronizing. students to read by paying them between $1 and $2
T h e y a c t u a l l y t o o k offence to the money,? said for every book read, up to a maximum of 20 books
s u p e r i n t e n d e n t T h o m a s K i n g s t o n . ?Those stu- in a school year. Using a combination of private
d e n t s w h o w e r e a l r e a d y d o i n g all r i g h t anyways, and corporate donations, the program has helped
t h o u g h t , ?Hey! T h i s is O K . I can p i c k u p some more than 75,000 students read nearly 730,000
change o n m y w a y out.?? ; books. After finishing each book, students take a
After four years, officials saw no improve- comprehension test that they must pass with a
ment and cancelled the program. ?We thought that score of 80% or higher i n order to get paid.
maybe the money might make a difference, but it Ms. Morris-Lindsey says the findings of the
doesn?t.? Harvard study show the importance of providing
The experience at Stone Creek Elementary incentives d u r i n g a student's learning process Ur
School in Rossville, Ga., however, was markedly stead of simply rewarding good test scores.
different. ?You have to provide incentives for the pre
Principal Mike Culberson didn?t pay stu- requisites,? she said. ?You cannot alone incent a
dents, but offered prizes ranging from ice cream to child for a good grade because childrenhave ©
Xbox video game consoles. It worked. learn the process they have to go through to 8°
Between 2003 and 2004 the number of stu- that good grade. As children read, they com
dents missing more than 15 days during the year hend more. As they comprehend more, y o 8u°
dropped to 4.7%, down from 15%. Mr. Culberson byproduct of good grades. You get a thinker
.
v e theif
:
says test scores improved as r e s u l t .

a
Encouraging students to improv but
?We tell kids, ?We can?t force you to come to academic performance is a laudable pracc®
s c h o o l , b u t w e can encourage y o u w i t h these re- many school boards are motivated to dos ?
w a r d s to w a n t t o come to school,?? he said. ?If w e slightly less altruistic reasons. Under the No
C h a p t e6r ¢ Develop Alternatives 113
sndAct of 2001, schools are ranked partly trend of schools providing students with commer-
pet ndancerecords. And much of how states cial compensation, such as iPods and free lunches.
fea t ate federal money 1Sdetermined by average ?The idea of directly tying learning to mon-
gt dance. For schools in poor districts, this etary compensation seems to run very deeply
dailyF y millions. against the whole idea of learning. If in the end
on some educators wam students are being we end up promoting consumer values more than
wrong message about learning if they are educational values, we should be concerned about
gent
tn yjew it as an economic transaction, an that.?
uit one professor characterizes as the ?hid- The Toronto District School Board?s anti-
oat curriculum.? poverty task force has identified 110 schools out
den af students are in a math lesson andthey?re of 600 that are negatively affected by poverty, and
idto be there,w hat? s really going onhere? K i d s w i l l hold public hearings early next year before
P i n g taught that it?so n l y worth learning some- making any decisions on the proposal.
thing ifyou're going to receive some sort of mone- ; ?For some kids, maybe some kind of incen-
compensation,?said Trevor Norris, a professor tive system is going to help,? said Mr. Spence. ?But
tthe University of Toronto's OntarioInstitute for I don?t know. I don?t know the answer.?
studies in Education. He has studied the growing
. source: Material reprinted with the express permission of: ?National Post Inc.?
? _ ? ?
1, What are some of the alternatives identified in the 4. How would you choose alternatives that balance
article? Which g r o u p o f s t a k e h o l d e r s f a v o r s each the d i f f e r e n t interests o f stakeholders?
one? Why? . 5. W h a t are some of the alternatives t h a t y o u
2. How would you characterize the policy type and w o u l d consider if you were an education policy-
mechanisms that dominate the alternatives pro- maker trying to i m p r o v e education outcomes?
posed? How do you know? Why?
3, Which of the alternatives described i n the article
would you most support? W h i c h ones w o u l d
you most oppose? Explain your response.
e e a e e e e e
Selected Websites
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy a more conservative political orientation. Contrast
Research. Available at the solutions offered here w i t h those offered b y the
httplhoww.aei.orgl, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, whose
website is also provided in this list.
t i a l website of the A m e r i c a n E n t e r p r i s e .
Wate
sot U b l i c Policy Research ( A E I ) . A E I is a Canadian Centre f o r Policy Alternatives. A v a i l a b l e a t

Pivate,
to nonpartisan, nonprofit institution dedicated http:ltoww policyaltenatives.cal.
va 7
earch and e d u c a t i o n o n issues o f g o v e r n m e n t , : . cal,
?S, economics, a n d social w e l f a r e . The i n s t i t u t e The official w e b s i t e o f t h e C a n a d i a n C e n t r e f o r
Publi i reearch a n d conferences o n a v a r i e t y o f Policy A l t e r n a t i v e s ( C C P A ) . The C C P A is a n i n d e -

site 0! cy issues, Education leaders may find
to
pendent, nonpartisan research institute concerned

veg Interesting in terms of the education alter- with issues of social, economic, and environmental
ants :
Presented under its research tab. The vari- justice. The website contains information on a vari-
o f Policy S o l u t i o n s t e n d t o b e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h ety of research endeavors a d d r e s s i n g c h i l d r e n a n d
C H A P T E R
Weigh the Options

Evaluating Alternatives
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After reading this chapter, y o u w i l l be able to:
s Develop analytical strategies to evaluate alternatives

s Describe the potential benefits and costs of alternatives
« Describe key criteria and measures that w i l l help w e i g h options
« Package alternatives f o r quick comparisons
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
You are the principal o f a small, close-knit public high school in the M i d w e s t o f the
United States, There has been a rash of school violence nationwide, both at the second-
ary and higher education levels, b u t you are not particularly worried about your school.
Notwithstanding, the district superintendent has charged all principals to think o f policies
that balance individual freedoms, academic accountability, and school safety. Thus far,
three options are on the table: (1) create a strict zero-tolerance policy, including the moni-
loring of student Internet activity; (2) implement a peace-maker program where nonviolent
Strategies are taught to the students; and (3) hire an additional counselor to reduce the
punber Of students in each counselor's current load. As you try to balance the concerns
he community, you wonder what would be the best way to find working definitions o f
om e r a that are important. As you think about the board of directors, superintendent,
objeche teachers, and other stakeholder groups, you realize that they may have different
Weigh
88. You are not sure h o w you will proceed, b u t you want to make sure that you can
9 the different options.
What do you do?
115
116 Chapter 7 * W e i g h the Options
H O W D O Y O U W E I G H Y O U R OPTIONS?
In conducting policy analysis, you will have to weigh options even if thePolit,
legal process w i l l be the final arbiter of what is done. Cooksey and Freebod am or
recognize that i f you are deliberating, you need information. Thischapterh ighii, 6)
the .
Kind of analytical information that you should seek when weighing altern .
atives,T h i
is not to say that the policy analytical process is not itself political. However reflect;
vs eee
:
Teflectin,
on the role of politics and n o r m a t i v e considerations i n the act o f Tecommending oli
action w i l l be covered m o r e f u l l y i n Chapter 8. Policy
The
.
explicit, evaluation of alternatives
.
.
is an important policy analytical
:
tose
ste
P be.
cause if the decision-making process is covert and intuitive, it is more likely to redy
accountability. For example, Peterson a n d Rothstein (2010) indicate that there was k e n
ticism on the part of m a n y education leaders regarding the selection ofDelawarea n
Tennessee as w i n n e r s of the first r o u n d of the federal Race to the Top grant. The authors
indicate t h a t this skepticism was a result of the perceived arbitrariness of theselection
Process. Federal policymakers have subsequently revised the program since its first
phase to ensure greater transparency on h o w states rise to the top. Consequently, one
of the p r i m a r y tasks i n w e i g h i n g y o u r options is to be explicit and grounded about the
rationale u n d e r l y i n g y o u r evaluation.
This chapter offers guidelines on h o w to consider and articulate the rationaleused
to w e i g h p o l i c y options. This process is closely tied to that described i n Chapter 5, where
w e discussed d r i v i n g values, b u t it has some key differences. The focus of the Process
used to establish d r i v i n g values is to examine the cost of various alternatives, the net
benefits associated w i t h the outcomes associated w i t h them, the administrative ease as-
sociated w i t h i m p l e m e n t i n g that alternative, and so on. Once you have established the
broad concerns that you have, it is i m p o r t a n t to offer a rationale on h o w you w i l l choose
a m o n g these b r o a d a n d sometimes conflicting concerns. This entails a discussion of
n o t only the values of the analysis b u t also of the values of the system that w i l l define
h o w choices are to be made, That is, establishing y o u r d r i v i n g values and constructing
alternatives w i l l result i n a set of alternatives f r o m w h i c h you w i l l choose based on the
criteria deemed to be important. W e i g h i n g y o u r alternatives w i l l outline the process by
w h i c h alternatives rise to the top. Consequently, this chapter offers guidelines on how
to articulate the rationale used to w e i g h policy options. It is less about what the driving
values of the analysis w i l l look like (the subject o f Chapter 5) and more about the techni-
cal skills a n d analytical i n f o r m a t i o n that w i l l help you choose among them.
This discussion has three major sections. The first section focuses on discussing
the f u t u r e and assessing the potential net benefits of alternatives. This discussion is
i m p o r t a n t because education leaders often have to anticipate w h a t the future holds and
act accordingly. Once you have established the parameters that w i l l frame your deci-
sion, it is i m p o r t a n t to forecast w h a t set of activities w i l l likely lead to the desired out-
comes on the values being considered. The second part of the discussion onweighing
options indicates h o w you w o u l d frame the rationale f o r including key criteria. This
p a r t is i m p o r t a n t because it addresses explicitly the decision rule that w i l l be used not
o n l y to choose among competing alternatives b u t also to rank the competingvalues
that w i l l d r i v e the decision. The third section discusses h o w to package the alternatives
and the use o f quick analysis for systematic comparisons. This discussion is important
f o r ediication leaders because no clear w i n n e r is likely among the alternatives being
considered. Being able to p r o v i d e a systematic comparison to your constituents an
Chapter 7 * Weigh the Options 117
rs makes it easier for them to understand why certain packages of options rose to
r e n e . The chapter closes w i t h a summary of its keypoints.
the to
anticipating t h e F u t u r e
in weighing your options in ex ante analysis, you need to be able to say something
about the future. That is, in evaluating alternatives, you are making an assertion about
pow well you think a particular option w i l l do in achieving the objectives of the crite-
ria chosen. Because you are projecting, conjecturing, or predicting, your assessment
about how well each option w i l l really do is uncertain. You need to state the probable
intended consequences of the decision, identify the negative consequences, and explain
how you plan to mitigate the negative effects (e.g., Willower & Licata, 1997).
SAFEGUARDS IN FORECASTING. Patton and Sawicki (1993) offer technical and political
safeguards that you can use to avoid the inevitable errors in forecasting. They argue
that a good rule of thumb entails being accurate but not unreasonable in your expecta-
tions of the data. For example, i f you have information about school districts, this does
not mean that you w i l l be able to speak meaningfully about individual schools. Even
when you make forecasts about the appropriate unit of analysis, you should under-
stand the likely costs and benefits of the method chosen. Generally, simple forecast
strategies may be less costly, but they may also yield less precise results.
In weighing the relative benefits of the policy options, it is important to check if more
complex forecasting methods can yield more useful results than simple methods. For ex-
ample, maybe the literature does not offer specific information on the net benefits for the
alternatives that you are considering. You may be unable to tell the exact cost of imple-
menting a new program without doing additional analysis. However, if greater accuracy
will not lead you to rank the alternatives differently, it will not be a good use of resources
to get more precise information. Instead, it may be better for you to compare alternatives
using ordinal data that ranks alternatives (e.g, this program is more or less expensive than
another) rather than spend more resources to generate a precise measure of the criterion.
The purpose of policy analysis is to offer a process where leaders can make the
world a better place. To safeguard against making faulty prescriptions, education
leaders can create scenarios for each strategy recommended for an uncertain future.
Scenarios are descriptions you create to describe the future based on different assump-
tions of contexts and outcomes. In their creation of these descriptions, education lead-
ers should anticipate how well the status quo can respond to the consequences of each
alternative not working out as planned.
To clear political hurdles, i t is useful to have a transparent process a n d to err on
the side of caution. Describe f o r readers w h a t the likely impact on outcomes are i f y o u r
Predictions are wrong. I f you are unsure of the political and administrative s u p p o r t that
Particular options w i l l garner, you should indicate h o w reliable y o u r current p o l i t i c a l
analysis is and w h a t factors w o u l d cause y o u r recommendations to change.
Discussing Relevant C r i t e r i a
Appropriately anticipating the f u t u r e is an i m p o r t a n t aspect of w e i g h i n g y o u r options.
b a n education leader, you also need to make clear the basis on w h i c h the f u t u r e is
*ing forecasted. That is, the act of forecasting outcomes needs to be s u p p l e m e n t e d
118 Chapter 7 e Weigh the Options
w i t h the task of selecting criteria and their appropriate measures. You neeg £0 expy.:
t h e importance o f each criterion to the analysis. A s p a r t of y o u r discussion,i n d , ?un
w h i c h stakeholder g r o u p is affected b y t h a t criterion a n d d e t a i l t h e Objectives as Cate
ated w i t h its inclusion. Y o u must be clear r e g a r d i n g the dimensions ang measure -
each criterion. Y o u w i l l forecast these measures into the future. Y o u should prow: of
enough detail to the readers so that w h e n y o u assert that one o p t i o n is likely tob e m e
effective (or fair, or feasible, etc.) than the other, readers w i l l be able to look at the i n
and come to the same conclusion. Readers should be clear w h a t y o u mean b y effecting
fair, or feasible.
MEASURING EFFECTIVENESS. When you are considering effectiveness, the focus is on

expected outcomes. You need to look at the evidence to determine how likely a par.
ticular approach w i l l attain the outcomes that you seek. The more closely the expected
outcomes reflect your goals and objectives in your approach to solving the problem, the
more effective you would consider that approach.
Patton and Sawicki (1993) i d e n t i f y four m a j o r methods o f forecasting the effec.
tiveness o f a policy: opinion, sampling, time-series analysis, and associative techniques
(e.g., regression). Forecasts generated f r o m o p i n i o n s rely on m u l t i p l e t i m e horizons
a n d are often the least accurate, b u t t h e y are also the least costly w a y to obtain data
o n the probable effects of an alternative. S a m p l i n g relies on e x a m i n i n g the behavior
o r outcomes o f a p o r t i o n of the population a n d generalizing f r o m those results. This -
m e t h o d m a y generate h i g h l y accurate estimates, d e p e n d i n g on the data available, the

stability o f trends, and the representativeness of the.sample d r a w n . I t also tends to be
m o r e costly than opinions b u t tends to be less expensive than t i m e series o r associative
techniques. T i m e series analysis requires the collection of o p i n i o n o r sample data over
m u l t i p l e periods. I f the time period from w h i c h y o u are projecting is stable, this tech-
n i q u e generally provides accurate projections. Because of the a d d e d complexities of this
method, it is often more costly than simple o p i n i o n or sampling. Associated techniques
examine systematically the relationships among variables. T h e y t e n d to be the most
costly forecasting methods, and the accuracy of their predictions is closely tied to the
specified m o d e l on w h i c h they are based and the variables therein.
e What are the criteria that will undergird my choice?

¢ Why Is it Important to include these criteria?
e Provide a rationale for each criterion. Which stakeholder group favors Inclusion of this criterion? What are
the objectives of its Inclusion?
¢ How will | know if! have more or less of a particular criterion?

e What will more effectiveness look like? What measures allow me to know?
© What will more equity look like? What measures allow me to know?
¢ What will more economical look like? What measures allow me to know?
¢ What will more political feasibility look like? What measures allow me to know?
¢ What will more of an ability to be implemented look like? What measures allow me to know?
FIGURE 7.1 Overarching Questions for Discussing Criteria in Weighing of Options

Chapter 7 ©
Weigh the Options 119
R a t h e r than use a n y o f the p r i m a r y forecasting techniques i d e n t i f i e d , y o u m a y

_ply choose to go to the l i t e r a t u r e for guidance. By d o i n g a comprehensive litera-
su review, y o u m a y be able to p r o v i d e sufficient g r o u n d i n g for the expectations that
describe and thep o l i c i e s y o u prescribe. For example, policy analysts for G r o w t h
y o
and Justice, a progressive t h i n k tank, w e i g h e d a variety of education p o l i c y options
pased OFi n f o r m a t i o n garnered f r o m extensive reviews of the literature. Relying on
extant research ish e l p f u l even i f y o u are uncomfortable r a n k i n g the alternatives w i t h
the quality of i n f o r m a t i o n possessed. From previous research, y o u should be able to
addressw h e t h e rt h e o p t i o n y o u are considering is likely to be effective. For example,
if the literature consistently indicates that m o r e school time is associated w i t h higher
student achievement,t h e n y o u m a y rate strategies to increase school time as effective
i n i m p r o v i n g student achievement, citing the literature as evidence (e.g., Gandara &
Fish, 1994).
MEASURING EQUITY. Considerations of fairness m a y lead y o u to focus on outcomes

as well as on the p o l i c y mechanisms employed. The g u i d i n g questions f o r p r o v i d i n g a
working definition of equity focus on whether the outcomes associated w i t h a particu-

lar strategy w i l l lead to a d i s t r i b u t i o n of benefits that m i r r o r y o u r notions of fairness.
It also involves l o o k i n g at h o w the costs (in terms of money, effort, time, etc.) are dis-
tributed across those w h o have to i m p l e m e n t the strategy. Y o u need to be clear about
what dimensions of e q u i t y are i m p o r t a n t , and you need to detail w h a t characteristics
are associated w i t h more equity. For example, is a policy considered m o r e fair if more
of its benefits accrue to those w h o were previously i l l served by the system, o r is fair-
ness based on equal benefits accruing to all members of society? W h a t measures w i l l
you employ to illustrate w h e t h e r either definition is realized? For example, w i l l y o u use
standard statistical measures of d i s t r i b u t i o n presented i n school finance literature, such
as coefficient of variation, the McLoone Index, a n d so on (e.g., Berne & Steifel, 1984;
Odden & Picus, 2009)? Is there evidence i n practice o r in the literature that supports
your expectations?
MEASURING COSTS. Economic considerations are often tied to the resources used to
implement a particular option. Such considerations may include the affordability of a
Project or the efficiency o f u s i n g resources i n a particular way. A f f o r d a b i l i t y m a y be de-
termined b y estimating the cost o f i m p l e m e n t i n g specified strategies and d e t e r m i n i n g if
those costs are w i t h i n the l i k e l y b u d g e t of the implementing organization. The greater
t h e portion of the b u d g e t that is needed to f u l f i l l the objectives of the strategies out-
, the less affordable is the project, other things being equal. Y o u can also determine
* '8 a policy considered more fair if more of its benefits accrue to those who were previously ill served by the
System, or is faimess based on equal benefits accruing to all members of society?
* ls there evidence in practice or in the literature that supports your expectations?
e
What measures will you employ to illustrate your working definition of equity?
°n l YOu use standard statistical measures of distribution presented In the school finance literature, such as
Coefficient of variation, the McLoone Index, and so on?
Figy RE 7.2 Guiding

oa:
Questions in Measuring Equity
120 Chapter 7 * Weigh the Options
© Does the proposed project fit within current budget constraints?
© Does the proposed project fit within the amounts normally expended on similar programs?
© {s the proposed policy likely to be efficient, using standard economic measures employed in the i
erature
FIGURE 7.3 G u i d i n g Questions f o r M e a s u r i n g E c o n o m i c V i a b i l i t y
the relative efficiency of the alternatives b y u s i n g standard economic Meas

Ures 5
net present value, cost-benefit ratio, o r thei n t e r n a l rate of return (e.g., PattoNn & San a
1993), A project is economically feasible o n l y if the n e t present value excee
ds 0, thecose
benefit ratio is greater than 1, o r the rate o f return is m o r e than the intere
things being equal, a project yields a m o r e efficient use o f resources the h i Sher the level
of these ratios. ,
MEASURING POLITICAL FEASIBILITY. Political c o n s i d e r a t i o n s are often w e d d e d to
stakeholder acceptance of the definition of the p r o b l e m and b u y - i n Tegarding the strats

gies proposed. The more the political s u p p o r t o u t w e i g h s its opposition, the more ou
can consider an option to be politically feasible. Y o u w o u l d use the knowledge gleaned
from stakeholder analysis (e.g., Coplin & O?Leary,1998) a n d general guidance Provided
i n the literature to assess the level of political feasibility. For example, you may deter.
mine that a higher positive score on the p o w e r analysis w i l l be considered more politi.
cally feasible. You w i l l need to detail for the reader w h y an o p t i o n got a higher score
than did other alternatives. Is it because stakeholder g r o u p s w h o supported that option
made it a priority? Was opposition to that alternative muted? H o w so? Being explicit
about w h y you came to the conclusions that y o u d i d is important. Note that this isa
subjective process, and political analysis is nuanced, b u t y o u should still have a clear,
grounded rationale for the conclusions that you d r a w regarding the net political sup-
port f o r a particular alternative.
MEASURING THE ABILITY OF AN ALTERNATIVE TO BE IMPLEMENTED. Administrative

operability is associated w i t h the difficulty or ease o f i m p l e m e n t i n ga particular policy
alternative. Your knowledge of the context i n w h i c h options w i l l beimplemented al
lows you to asses whethera particular approach is m o r e o r less difficult to administe
The literature o r professional knowledge w i l l guide y o u i n that assessment.Again, yu
m u s t be clear about w h y you came to y o u r conclusion. For example, you maybe oe
sidering a variety of options to compensate teachers, i n c l u d i n g using individual tea
Does likely overall support of the policy exceed its likely opposition?
e Have stakeholder groups who support or oppose this policy made it apriority?
© How do the stakeholder groups stack up? Do powerful groups tend to support or to oppose the policy?
* Was opposition (support) to that alternative muted? How $0?
FIGURE 7.4 Guiding Questions for Measuring Political Feasibility

C h a p t e7r ® Weigh the Options 121
our p l a n v e r y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e s t a t u s q u o ?
s .
i those who rave to implement your plan have less power than before?
e 00the proposedbeneficiarieso f yourplan support it?

e
ithe policy mechanism that you chose typically easy to administer?

e
AGURE 7.5 Guiding Questions for Measuring the Ability of the Policy to Be Implemented
ay-for-performance programs, implementing schoolwide incentives, or rewarding

members based solely on their education and experience. You may decide that
individual teacher pay-for-performance programs have the most challenges to imple-
mentation. You need to detailt h e basis for that conclusion and to provide the evidence
that supports it. Is it because individual reward plans are the most different from the
status quo? Willi mplementers have less power than before the policy is implemented?
Ig it because the beneficiaries of the policy do not support it? Are incentives hard to
administer in general?
packaging Y o u r A l t e r n a t i v e s
When packaging y o u r alternatives, y o u m a y decide to group activities that are (1) geared
toward implementers at different levels of the organization or system, (2) targeted at
different beneficiaries, (3) focused on different u n d e r l y i n g causes, (4) a modification of
previous policies, o r (5) an a m a l g a m a t i o n of a hodgepodge set of activities. Y o u m u s t
review each package on the set of criteria chosen for the analysis. Repackaging y o u r
strategies creates a different alternative that can affect the likely effectiveness of t h a t
proposal and its feasibility i n terms o f costs, political acceptability, and administrative
operability. Consequently, i n w e i g h i n g options, you need to subject a repackaged alter-
native to the same r e v i e w as its component parts.
Distinguishing A m o n g A l t e r n a t i v e s
Policy options are not mutually exclusive, but they must be distinguishable. To com-
pare the alternatives, you need a systematic way of distinguishing among them and
Weighing their benefits (or limitations) against each criterion. The essence of an alterna-
live is its ability to address the underlying factor resulting in a policy problem; variants
include the implementation and financing mechanisms proposed. Whether you use
Atemative policy packages grouped separately based on:
* Impiementers at different levels of the organization or system who will be responsible for its
implementation
* Beneficiaries at whom the policy Is targeted
* Undertying factors that drive policy strategy
* Previous policies
* Hodgepodge set ofactivities
Figy
RE 7.6 Packaging o f Alternatives So That They Can Be Evaluated and Weighed
122 Chapter7 ¢ Weigh the Options
lysis, y o u need to c o m p a r e all p r o p o s e d alt
igs ae
titative or qualitative analy é

mat
Ait relevant criteria By the end of the analysis, readers s h o u l d be clear aboutt h e w ? on
s a n d w h y t h e y r a n k t h e w a y t h e y d o o n e a c hc r i t e r i o n ,
:
e option .
t i o n s a m o n g the oP
h y select a l t e r n a t i v e s r o s e t o t h e t o p .
a
ti s ,
r e a d e r s m u s t b e clear W
USING QUICK Q U A N T I T A V E A N A L Y S I S
atton and Sawicki (1993) provide a good overview o f quick methods of compa:
alternatives They include paired comparisons, satisficing, lexicographic ordering #
nondominated alternatives method, the equivalent alternatives method, the stan d e
alternatives method, and the matrix display system (scorecard). These methods wd
in their ability to deal clearlyw i t hmultiple criteria a n d options i n a Parsimonigy,
way. Paired comparisons are set up like the games i n a National Collegiate Athlete
Association (NCAA) basketball tournament, where one team (alternativ €) is p i t t
against another until the winner is the last team (alternative) standing.
Satisficing is choosing
the first acceptable
ak option. Lexiographic ordering ig
a modified version of satisficing, where decision makers do not weigh the criteri,
equally, and the first alternative that meets them o s ti m p o r t a n tc r i t e r i o n is the one that
is preferred. The nondominated alternative, e q u i v a l e n t a l t e r n a t i v e , and standards al.
ternative methods all try to standardize the d i f f e r e n t criteria so that the benefits and
limitations of each option may be compared m o r e easily. The process can be a bit cum-
bersome and may presume more agreement a m o n g stakeholders regarding the ranking
of criteria than actually exists.
Using a matrix or a scorecard allows a s i m p l e i l l u s t r a t i o n o f k e y criteria and how
the alternatives fare on each. Because this approach p r o v i d e s a relatively simple way
to display multiple criteria and alternatives, it is e m p h a s i z e d i n the remainder of this
chapter discussion. Note that, regardless of the a p p r o a c h used, y o u m u s t consider the
potential consequences of the alternatives and deal w i t h trade-offs. That is, an option
may be technically effective but politically infeasible, p o l i t i c a l l y feasible b u t too costly,
theoretically effective but problematic to administer, a n d so on.
C r e a t i n g a Scorecard
A scorecard is an outcomes matrix that has alternatives s u m m a r i z e d d o w n the rows
and criteria summarized across the columns (Bardach, 2009; Patton & Sawicki, 1993).
To compare each package of alternatives, start with a brief description of the key
Criterion 1
Criterion 2 Criterion 3 ,
© Needed or preferred? © Needed or preferred? e Needed ofp reter?
° More (less) Is better? © More (less) is better? © More (less) is better:
Alternative B
FIGURE 7,
7 Example o f Template f o r Creating an O u t c o m e s M a t r i x (Scorecard)
Chapter
7 ©
Weigh the Options 123
nents of eachh policy option. Identify and describe

ibe th policy types and mecha -
i
P
; the
comp
:
°Cc ontained within the policy package. Those descriptions enable you to highlight
choice of instrument, as well as its forecasted outcomes, can influence the fea-
tality of the policyalternative.
$
uating A l t e r n a t i v e s : The Single-Step, Norm-Based A p p r o a c h

eval
an compare the alternatives as a g r o u p and rank them along each criterion. That
You ¢
is, for each criterion, r a n k h o w w e l la na l t e r n a t i v e is likely to do on this measure rela-
live to other options considered. ThisProcess is analogous to comparisons made i n
standard normed tests, where students performance is rated based on w h e t h e r t h e y
outperformed or u n d e r p e r f o r m e d their peers on a particular exam. A n example of h o w
this evaluative approach w o r k si s illustrated b y comparing three proposals f o r increas-
ing thep a r t i c i p a t i o n o f w o m e n i n college science programs: (1) p r o v i d i n g incentives
to female faculty members i nt h e sciences, (2) p r o v i d i n g incentives to female students
entering the sciences, o r (3) p r o v i d i n g information to change perception of the sciences.
In weighing those alternatives, for each criterion, indicate w h i c h o p t i o n is m o s t
likely to f u l f i l l itsobjectives. The o p t i o n that is m o s t likely to produce the outcomes
sought for a particular criterion is rated m o s t h i g h l y on that criterion. The o p t i o n t h a t
is least likely to produce the outcome sought f o r a specific criterion is rated the l o w e s t
on that criterion. Options t h a t produce results i n the m i d d l e are ranked appropriately.

Thus, if providing incentives to female faculty members is considered the m o s t effec-
tive of the three options, it w o u l d be ranked the highest on the effectiveness measure.
However, p r o v i d i n g incentives to female faculty members m a y also be the m o s t costly,
thus it is ranked lowest on the cost measure. Continue to compare and r a n k the alterna-
tives on all the measures u n t i l y o u have considered all the criteria.
Once you have completed those initial rankings, leave the rankings as is and again
let the political process determine which option is preferred given the rankings. You
could also provide more guidance to policymakers given your knowledge and insight by
Effectiveness Political Feasibility

(More Leads to Costs (More Leads (More Leads to
Higher Rankings) to Lower Rankings) Higher Rankings
Provide incentives to female

faculty members in the
_ L a h
sciences
Provide incentives to female

students entering the
Sciences
Providing Information to
Lowest Highest Highest
change perception of the
Sciences,
FI .
GURE 7 . 8 E x a m p l e o f E v a l u a t i v e Process U s i n g S i n g l e - S t e p S c o r e c a r d R a n k i n g s
Note;
Pap
ennformation based o n l i t e r a t u r e (e.g., Marschke Laursen, Nielsen, & Rankin, 2007 a n d m o d i f i c a t i o n o f s t u d e n t
124 Chapter 7 © Weigh the Options
indicating w h i c h option you recommend and w h y . For example, y o u may de-:
optiont h a t h a st h e m o s t u m b e r of top rankings ont h ec r i t e r i a consi deres i s n t t h a t the

propriate choice. You may decide to designateone c r i t e r i o n as p r i m a r y and t h e ost ap.
the alternative that is ranked most highly on that criterion. The k e y p o i n t igt h a t choose
to make it clear to the audience w h ya particular o p t i o n rose to the top. The a YOu hay
iin .
ti
fered should be consistent w i t h the data and explicative narrative that youProvide ~
E v a l u a t i n g A l t e r n a t i v e s : The T w o - S t e p , C r i t e r i o n - B a s e d A p p r o a c h
Rather than conduct the comparison and r a n k i n g of alternatives i n one step, yo

compare and rank them in two. First, take each alternativea n d i n d i v i d u a l l y com v1c a n
on each criterion, p u t t i n g aside its relative standing vis a vis o t h e r alternatives pare it
w a y , y o u r e v i e w each option and decide if i t is l i k e l y to be h i g h l y , moderately, or
at all effective; very, somewhat, or hardly costly; a n d so on. Second, based onYour as
sessment of h o w well each option fulfilled the objectives o f each criterion, you can then
Step 1 in two-step comparative process: Individual rating of alternatives

Higher Rankings) to Lower Rankings) Higher Rankings)
Provide incentives to Very effective Very high
female faculty members
in the sciences
Provide incentives to Effective

female students entering :
the sciences
Providing information to Somewhat effective Very little Very high
change perception of ;
the sciences
Step 2 in two-step comparative process: Ranking of alternatives based on individual ratings

Alternatives Higher Rankings) to Lower Rankings) Higher Rankings)
Provide incentives to Highest

female faculty members
in the sciences
Provide Incentives to
female students entering
the sciences
Providing information to
change perception of
the sciences
FIGURE 7.9 Example of Evaluative Process Using Two-Step Scorecard Rankings

C h a p t e7r * Weigh the Options 125
e alternatives on each criterion in the way described in the previous subsection

rank Figure 7.9).
Once you have assessed the alternative on each criterion, a useful strategy
be to assign numbers to the rankings or criterion-based assessment that you
ma
me)completed. You can then simply choose the policy that has the highest score if
highet numbers area s s o c i a t e d w i t h m o r e favorable assessments. R e c o m m e n d t h e
option w i t h the lowest score if l o w e r n u m b e r s are associated w i t h m o r e f a v o r a b l e
gssessments. I n c o m p a r i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s , be aware t h a t an o p t i o n m a y s o m e t i m e s
dominate the others on one c r i t e r i o n b u t m a y r e m a i n infeasible w h e n o t h e r factors
sidered. Thus, i n r e c o m m e n d i n g an alternative, y o u m u s t decide i f y o u w i l l
are com
ye further consideration only to those options that meet the basic requirements on
all criteria.
? _ ? e ~ ?
~~
?_
Chapter S u m m a r y
When conducting p o l i c y analysis, y o u m u s t strategy employed, y o u m u s t j u s t i f y y o u r

figure out h o w to e v a l u a t e y o u r o p t i o n s . A decision. Because a l t e r n a t i v e s d o n o t u s u -
variety of criteria can g u i d e y o u r evaluation, a l l y d o m i n a t e all c r i t e r i a , y o u n e e d to a d -
including effectiveness, e q u i t y , costs, p o l i t i - dress trade-offs, i n d i c a t i n g h o w y o u c a m e
cal feasibility, and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o p e r a b i l i t y to the c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t y o u d i d . O n c e y o u
(the ability of the o p t i o n to be i m p l e m e n t e d ) . have w e i g h e d the alternatives, y o u h a v e l a i d
You have to create measures of each c r i t e r i o n the empirical f o u n d a t i o n f o r r e c o m m e n d i n g
so that decision m a k e r s and o t h e r stakehold- a p a r t i c u l a r course of action. H o w e v e r , w h o
ers have a clear idea of w h a t ?good? or ?ef- gets to decide w h i c h a l t e r n a t i v e rises t o the
fective? looks l i k e . Y o u can t h e n use q u i c k top is essentially a p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n a n d re-
analysis to systemize y o u r w e i g h t i n g of the quires n o r m a t i v e a r g u m e n t s . The n o r m a t i v e
alternatives so t h a t the bases of the evalua- aspects of m a k i n g a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n are the
tion are explicit. Regardless of the evaluative focus o f the next chapter.
Review Q u e s t i o n s
1.
How w o u l d the e v a l u a t i o n process de- As a group, you have decided that t h e salary
scribed i n this chapter help y o u to w e i g h the requirements, u r b a n savvy, e d u c a t i o n , a n d
different proposals described i n the chapter- experience are the four m a i n factors that w i l l
opening education vignette? influence y o u r choice of candidate. Create a
:
How is the evaluative process described scorecard that illustrates that process.
here the same or different from processes 4, Review the chapter-opening e d u c a t i o n v i -
you have used in the past? gnette. Create a scorecard to w e i g h each
' The scorecard approach may also be used to option on the appropriate criteria. Create a
evaluate candidates for particular positions. scenario that illustrates the same. D o y o u
Suppose you are a member of the board fora think that your decision is likely to d i f f e r de-
d Se urban school district and you are con- p e n d i n g on the evaluative a p p r o a c h used?
ucting a search f o r a n e w superintendent. Explain your response.
126 Chapter7 © Weigh the Options
News Story for Analysis M r . T h w e a t t insisted the _
?Teachers to tote guns in Texas; ?Embarrassing .? sary because the school is about 3 ¢ a e d 1S neces.
National Post ( f / k / a The Financial Post) (Canada). the nearest sheriff?s office in Vernon, Tex Utes from :
August 19, 2008 Tuesday. National Edition. meters n o r t h w e s t of Dallas. 240 kilo,
BYLINE: Mary Vallis, National Post. SECTION: He believes declaring schools gun.
NEWS; Pg. A3. LENGTH: 472 words o n l y makes t h e m m o r e attractive t o E® Zones

Teachers in Harrold, Tex., are bringing con- shooters, w h o k n o w they w i l l not bec h a l l e r enti
cealed handguns to class in an extreme attempt to A m i s h school shooting i n Pennsylvania a e The 1.
keep the district?s only school safe. h i m all schools are vulnerable, not just urbano m e
H a r r o l d I n d e p e n d e n t School District is be- The district?s p o l i c y , w h i c h passedu n a g
l i e v e d to be the f i r s t i n the United States to allow m o u s l y , a l l o w s school employees w i t h proni-
teachers to carry arms. The policy was introduced
licenses t o c a r r y concealed weapons while e n
in October, 2007, b u t is only coming to public atten-
f o r m i n g their n o r m a l duties. M r . Thweatt would .
tion n o w , re-igniting a debate over whether guns

not c o m m e n t o n h o w m a n y teachers carry guns,
have a place i n schools.
Experts argue it w o u l d make more sense to
?I can lead m y c h i l d r e n f r o m a tornado. I
hire p r i v a t e security o r a l l o w police officers into
can lead m y c h i l d r e n f r o ma f i r e . I can lead them
the school, b u t the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t believes his -
f r o m the r a i l r o a d tracks that r u n about 400 feet

district?s s o l u t i o n is better because it keeps guns :
f r o m us. I can lead them f r o ma toxic spill quickly.

I c a n n o t lead t h e m f r o m an active shooter,? D a v i d out of sight, l e a v i n g students to remain focused on :
their studies. ;
T h w e a t t , the d i s t r i c t ' s superintendent, said i n a
Educators i n H o u s t o n , where armed police
telephone interview. ?We had to come u p w i t h a
solution.? regularly patrol schools, disagree. ?
A Nevada-based firearms training center has Gayle F a l l o n , p r e s i d e n t of the Houston:

Federation o f Teachers, called the policy ?embar-
o f f e r e d every teacher i n H a r r o l d a free, four-day
rassing? and ?the stupidest m o v e that I have seen
h a n d g u n course.
? F i n a l l y , a p u b l i c school gets i t right,? done i n p u b l i c education. \
?This is the sort o f t h i n g that puts us on late-
said I g n a t i u s Piazza, f o u n d e r of the Front Sight
Firearms T r a i n i n g Institute. ?To prevent a school n i g h t T V i n Texas,? added Ms. Fallon, who ownsa ?
s h o o t i n g massacre y o u must be prepared to stop .357 handgun.

She characterized the situation in Harrold as
the attack immediately. Placing a g u n i n the hand
of a trained teacher is the answer.? a tragedy w a i t i n g to happen.
The school, w h i c h has 110 students ranging ?Whether they?re r u r a l or urban children,
f r o m kindergarten to Grade 12, already has state- they have one t h i n g i n common: They are all fasci-
of-the-art camera and alarm systems, in addition to nated b y guns, a n d they w i l l play w i t h them if they ,
card-swipe entries and a button that locks all doors. find them,? she said.
Source: Material reprinted with the express permission of: ?National Post Inc.? 4
among
1. W h a t is t h e p o l i c y i s s u e f a c i n g t h e e d u c a t i o n 3. W h a t are the criteria i m p l i e d for choosing which
c o m m u n i t y d e s c r i b e d i n t h e article? W h o a r e t h e these options? Given the policy chosen,
stakeholders? criterion seems to be the most importan
2. I d e n t i f y the d i f f e r e n t p o l i c y options that 4. Create scenarios f o r e a c h option.
?__
provide
c o u l d h a v e b e e n c h o s e n to a d d r e s s t h e p r o b l e m 5. Create a scorecard to w e i g h the option
identified. a rationale for your response.
C h a p t e7r * Weigh the Options 127
d Websites
selecte
rtment of Education. Race to the Top Fund. G r o w t h and Justice. Smart Investments in Minnesota's
5. be
.
ble a
t Students. Available at
Availa o w h e d . g o v l p r o g r a m s t r a c e t o t h e t o p !
http:/lwww.growthandjustice.orgleducation_report.
html,
inde ie
official ebsite of the Race to the Topi n i t i a t i v eiti Part of the official website of G r o w t h a n d Justice.
ored b y the U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n . T h e The site provides a report, p o l i c y briefs, and
, n t includes a description of the purpose of the research papers o n w h a t the literature indicates are
webei n applicants, scores, and reviewers? com- cost-effective strategies for i m p r o v i n g education
e e Italso provides details o n h o w alternatives outcomes. Education leaders m a y find this site help-
e h 3) were weighed and the criteria that underlay f u l because it offers measures of cost f o r a v a r i e t y o f
( a tcision, Education leaders m a y f i n d this site education strategies, i n c l u d i n g investment i n early
refi not only because o f the detail i t provides o n childhood education, class size reduction, a n d y o u t h
the process of this m u l t i - b i l l i o n - d o l l a r program, but programs.
also because of the insight i t offers o n h o w criteria
are used in weighing multiple options.
selected References
Gandara, P, & F i s h , J. (1994, S p r i n g ) . Y e a r - r o u n d This policy brief published b y the Economic P o l i c y
schooling as an a v e n u e t o m a j o r s t r u c t u r a l r e f o r m . Institute reviews the decision process used to se-
Educational E v a l u a t i o n a n d P o l i c y A n a l y s i s , 16(4), lect states for the federal Race to the Top grant.
67-85. Education leaders m a y find this article h e l p f u l be-
This article examines three policy options that school cause it highlights the importance o f h o w the n a t u r e
leaders pursued i n their effort to extend the school of the decision process has an impact o n the c r e d i b i l -
year for their building. Education leaders m a y find
i t y of the decisions that the process yields.
this article interesting because o f the information it S i m o n , H . (1997). M o d e l s o f b o u n d e d r a t i o n a l i t y .
provides on key education reform strategies, includ- C a m b r i d g e , M A : M I T Press.
ing the impact of these efforts on multiple criteria, I n t h i s s e m i n a l text, S i m o n e x p o u n d s o n h i s d i s c u s -
including effectiveness (as measured by student s i o n o f s a t i s f i c i n g as a m e a n s o f c h o o s i n g a m o n g
achievement) and economic possibility (as measured alternatives. H e argues that, g i v e n the c o n s t r a i n t s
by the cost effectiveness of the use of school facilities).
o f i n d i v i d u a l s and institutions, the theoretical ideal
Peterson, W., & Rothstein, R. (2010, A p r i l 20). Let?s o f looking at all possible alternatives and choosing
do the numbers: D e p a r t m e n t o f Education?s ?Race the best option (optimizing) is u n l i k e l y in reality.
to the Top? Program offers o n l y a m u d d l e d path to Education leaders may find this classic text v a l u a b l e
the finish line (Economic P o l i c y I n s t i t u t e B r i e f i n g for its discussion on organizational! decision m a k i n g
Paper, #263).
Retrieved f r o m EducationP o l i c y in a w a y that explicitly considers the l i m i t s o f m a k -
Institute website: h t t p / / w w w . e p i . o r g / p u b l i c a t i o n s / ing optimal choices.
entry/BP263/,
Make Recommendations
C H A P T E R OBJECTIVES
# Describe underlying normative issues w h e n j u s t i f y i n g recommendations

= Identify the varying roles of the analyst
® Identify the need for advocacy
= Describe approaches to making recommendations
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
You are a m e m b e r o f a school board. You have been asked to review several policies
regarding the appropriate curriculum and adoption o f textbooks in science, and you must
decide from among three major proposals. One proposal updates the high school science
curriculum previously taught in the district. It relies on a standard science textthat incorpo-
rates the teaching o f evolution. Another proposal requires the teaching of intelligent dasign
along with evolution. It mandates the adoption o f a text that supplements thetraditional
science curriculum and the reading of a statement emphasizing that evolution is just one of
several theories. The third option requires that evolution n o t be taught at alll. It requires the
adoption of a new science text and curriculum.
How do you know which proposal is best? Should you be the one to decide?
T R A N S F O R M I N G TRADE-OFFS INTO PREFERRED RESULTS

;
. du
Y o u m a y w o n d e r w h y this text distinguishes between w e i g h i n g your options n f the

timately m a k i n g a recommendation. It m a y seem obvious that once comparis© end.
alternatives has been done, the preferred alternative w o u l d be the one to r e c
128
C h a p t e 8r ¢ M a k e Recommendations 129
Himes the recommendation step iso v e r looked, however, because the preferred
Som? ?geems ObVIOUS OF because some policy analysts consider the actual recommen-
option at policy outside their purview.
dati?napter 7 focused on how you would weigh policy alternatives. This chapter fo-
on how you decide on the appropriate policy. In essence, this chapter stands as a
cu of testing your wor,k and ensuringt h e coherence of your evaluative argument. It
?is0 delves more deeply into the appropriate role of policy analysts in making recom-
ions.
e e e discussion ism e a n t to emphasize the normative, multifaceted, and iterative
jure of the policy analytical process. As noted by Dunn (2004, p. 216), when recom-
ending policy action, you are essentially addressing the question of ?What should be
done?? [italics added]. In the public policy arena, the answer to this question often re-
uires 4 complex model of choice in the presence of numerous stakeholders, uncer-
in about outcomes, and the dynamic effect of time. It also requires a decision even
when it is not always clear who should decide.
Beyond Eeny, M e e n y , M i n y , M o e
The rationale u n d e r l y i n g p o l i c y analysis is choosing a strategy that w i l l alleviate a

negative social condition. E d u c a t i o n leaders may decide that the choice is a political
one best left to p o l i c y m a k e r s and the p o l i t i c a l process. K i n g d o n (1995) has w r i t t e n
extensively on the p o l i t i c a l process, i n c l u d i n g agenda setting, p o l i c y formulation, a n d
policy adoption. H e notes that p o l i c y m a k e r s often determine the p o l i c y issues that
make it to the f o r m a l agenda, b u t that it is p o l i c y analysts w h o often decide the c o m p o -
nents of the recommended alternatives. For example, state educational administrators
create the specific rules f o r p u t t i n g into practice the N o C h i l d Left Behind A c t passed
by federal policymakers.
Education leaders m a y decide that some major decisions are legal ones that are
best left to the courts. For example, Superfine (2009) highlights the tensions among j u -
dicial, scientific, and democratic (i.e., political) decision making. A n a l y z i n g Kitzmiller
», Dover,
Superfine explores the role of courts in education decisions. H e notes that a
plethora of factors influence w h e t h e r an education decision should be a scientific, dem-
ocratic, or judicial one. These factors include the wishes of the community, the public
dimensions of the issue at hand, existing law, and so on. A comprehensive legal analy-
sis is beyond the scope of this discussion; rather, this text looks at legal considerations
as just one of several cues used b y policy analysts to weigh a variety of options.
* Use the political (democratic) process.
* Let the courts decide.
* Let the analyst decide:
* Choose randomly amonga list of alternatives.

* Optimize?consider all alternatives along all criteria and choose the best one.
* Satisice?choose the first alternative that meets your basic requirements.
* Use a Scorecard?weigh options based on overall assessment on key criterla.
Fey . :
RE 8.1 Examples of Key Methods of Choosing Among Policy Options

130 C h a p t e8r ¢ Make Recommendations
ROLE O F THE A N A L Y S T
Transform Values into Results
Policy scholars note that the role oft h e policy analyst is to w o r k on solutions ,
policy problems. Formal policy analysisa l l o w s you to go beyond een m e 0 SPecif
moe. This discussion focuses on how education leaders and analystschoo €ny, Riiny
natives that they do and highlightst h e k i n d of information that you sho icthe .
recommending alternatives. In proposing policy, you explicitlytransform
a ©ek When
into preferred results. In doing so, you indicate that some outcomes are Mor,
than others. For instance, policymakers who favor liberty andi n d i v i d ualism . Value
uity may support school voucher programs for all students. A n example of Over eq.
proposal offered by governor-elect Rick Scott of Florida in 2010. He proposedthecs the
education dollars follow all students to the schools of their parents? choosing, re at State
of family wealth or school type (Matus, 2010). Education leaders who value eq eardless
liberty tend to be troubled by untargeted voucher plans, fearing that this strate. Over
shift attention away from students in need and siphon resources frompublic oe will
With contrasting objectives, education leaders may recommend those policies that no .
appropriately balance the values of key stakeholders. In someinstances, leaders Ost

decide simply to dictate those policies that reflect only their values. The recommend,
tion strategy adopted depends on the political culture and structure of the community
in which the leader operates.
Even if education leaders focus on the technical aspects o f the Problem, the
already indicate their preferences b y the objectives t h e y choose to pursue. As noted
i n previous chapters, your choices are grounded i n y o u r v a l u e system, and how you
prioritize your objectives has important normative elements. D u n n (2004), Patton and
Sawicki (1993), and Heck (2004) all speak to the importance o f values in the policy pro-
cess. A s an education leader, when you analyze the social problems that you face, your
values may also influence the different conclusions y o u come to regarding your role.
E d u c a t i o n L e a d e r as R e s e a r c h e r , B u r e a u c r a t , o r E n t r e p r e n e u r ?
C i t i n g Meltsner (1976), Patton and Sawicki (1993) indicate three types of analysts: tech-
nician (researcher), politician (bureaucrat), and entrepreneur. The technician focuses
m o r e on the analytical aspects of the policy process a n d pays little attention to its politi-
cal constraints. By contrast, the p o l i t i c i a n focuses more on personal advancement ands
overly concerned w i t h the political ramifications of policy decisions. The entrepreneur
balances both the analytical and political dimensions of the p o l i c y decision being made.
Nonetheless, given the complex nature o f the p o l i c y analytical process, it would
be incorrect to frame policy decisions as being either rational o r political (e.g., Patton
& Sawicki, 1993). This creates a false d i c h o t o m y suggesting thatp o l i t i c a l decisions
are never rational o r that technical decisions are always apolitical. D u n n (2004) n n n
for example, that rationality may be grounded in d i f f e r e n t values and is reflector
the diverse criteria that frame the analysis. Because analysts are n o t themselves
f r o m politics, it is essential for them to identify their assumptions, keep accuralé -
cords, use multiple sources of information, and e m p l o y replicable methods and a n sts
els (Patton & Sawicki, 1993). As noted previously i n this chapter, whether ane
should merely present options to elected leaders, p r o v i d e them w i t h advice, of ation
recommendations depends on the political structure that is i n place. As an educ
C h a p t e8r * M a k e Recommendations 131
y o u r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y is to examine . the facts s u r r o u n ding the problem and in-

a t h e recommendation process by noting how well or how badly potential strate-
ance your ideals.
gesad?
policy Analyst as
0 Adviser and Decision Maker
hose analyzing policy problems at all stageso f t h e analytical process w i l l face moral
ressure. This pressure 15 increased i f y o u r role is not simply to p r o v i d e a description
favailable alternatives, b u t also tom a k e recommendations on the most appropriate
rouse of action. You s h o u l d always keep i n m i n d that policy decisions affect lives and
the allocationo f l i m i t e d resources. Y o u bear the responsibility for the consequence
of your recommendation. Thus, w h e n conducting policy analysis, y o u need to k n o w
ourself and to determine the ethical foundations on w h i c h you base y o u r policy rec-
ommendations. As y o u reflect on the values presented in Chapter 1, consider again
which values you i d e n t i f y w i t h most closely. A s k yourself what ?good? or ?effective?
jooks like (outcomes), b u t also ponder w h a t you t h i n k is the right t h i n g to do (process).
Education leaders m u s t make choices that are n o t always popular, either because of the
strategy recommended or the outcomes they yield. Y o u should feel comfortable i n the
ethical grounding of the process that led to y o u r decision. You should be clear about
what you envision as ideal, and be able to justify y o u r recommendations and persuade
others that your recommendations are appropriate.
NEED FOR A D V O C A C Y
The arguments g r o u n d i n g the decision to pursue one set of policy actions versus an-
other require m a k i n g advocative claims. D u n n (2004) notes that advocative claims have
four distinct attributes: T h e y are actionable, prospective, value laden, ande t h i c a l l y
complex. Actionable means that the assertions you make are n o t only calls for action;
they can also be acted upon. Actionable recommendations are not meant to be ?thought
pieces.? Prospective means that the claims you make i n y o u r recommendations are
future-oriented; they are focused on w h a t lies ahead. Value laden indicates that y o u r
claims reflect y o u r values a n d philosophical orientations, either i m p l i c i t l y o r explicitly.
Ethically complex refers to the fact that the pursuit of one value is n o t always i n tan-
dem with the other values that you hold. Consequently, the standards that you use to
make a policy decision on w h a t is good and appropriate action are not always obvious
oreven straightforward,
The discussion i n C h a p t e r 7 focused largely on the actionable a n d prospective
acteristics of advocative claims. I t also focused on the analytical aspects i n v o l v e d i n
Weighing options. I w o u l d like to focus the discussion i n Chapter 8 on the value-laden
on
ethically complex nature o f recommendations. This approach is tied closely to the
Pening discussion on values i n Chapter 1.
Value-Laden A r g u m e n t s
men i e o f a logical argument is its claim and underlying warrants. Warrants are the
ion of evidence that support the assumptions held or assertions made. Asa n educa-
eader making a recommendation, your task is twofold. You must provide sub-
?mpirical support that the strategy you recommend w i l l actually generate the
forecasted results, and you must persuadet h e appropriate stakeholders t h a t

those results. To make your recommendation viable, you need to know what sy Want
are valued b y key stakeholders and to structure your arguments in q waythat wecOtes
meaningful. they fing
Fowler (2009) offers strategies that w i l l allow you to frame your ar
a w a y that fits the political context of your community. For example, if... T S in
education leader in a traditionalistic setting, you must identify and gain aon are an
of the elite for any policy action that you prescribe. Settings aredescribed Suppor
tionalistic if key decision makers tend to be elite members of the community, « tradj.
community is generally supportive of the ?old? ways of doing things (Blazar n t the
Consequently, your recommendation w i l l fare better if you draw on the t r a d i t 1984),
the communi ty. Ons of
I f y o u are a leader i n a moralistic setting, y o u m u s t emphasize thetranspare

the decision-making process. C o m m u n i t i e s o r organizations t h a t are considered of
alistic tend to value government action as w e l l as collective and open decision mM o r .
(Elazar, 1984). Consequently, you should also a l l o w m u l t i p l e opportunities for 8B
h o l d e r i n p u t and and
hasize h o w the change proposed serves the Stake.
put emphas ge
prop common good,
If you are a leader in an individualistic setting, you should emphasize the eff;
ciency implications of your proposed policy and the impact of the proposal on the local
economy. Communities that are considered individualistic typically have a stron, be-
lief in the power of markets and the process of bargaining (Elazar, 1984), 6
I t is u n l i k e l y that any c o m m u n i t y contains o n l y one p o l i t i c a l culture. However,
it is u s e f u l if y o u are aware of these general strategies and can m o d i f y y o u ra rguments
to h i g h l i g h t the values that prevail. I t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that, i n 2009, policymakers in
Texas, a state k n o w n for its traditionalistic c u l t u r e , adopted accreditation rulest h a t
led to l i t t l e o b v i o u s change i n the status quo. These rules w e r e targeted at degree.
g r a n t i n g colleges and universities other than Texas p u b l i c institutions. They were
m e a n t to p r o v i d e greater transparency regarding the o v e r s i g h t o f these institutions
w i t h o u t c h a n g i n g the m a n n e r in w h i c h these institutions w e r e overseen (Education
C o m m i s s i o n of the States, 2010). In Colorado, w h i c h scholars often characterize as
moralistic, policymakers adopted a b i l l i n M a y 2009 t h a t also addressed accredita-
t i o n concerns. C o l o r a d o b i l l SB-163 increased the transparency of the accreditation
process b y s t r e n g t h e n i n g the a l i g n m e n t between a c c o u n t a b i l i t y a n d accreditation
procedures in that state. It also specified the role o f the state b o a r d of education in
t h a t process (Education Commission of the States, 2010), I n Missouri, which scholars
often label as i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c , the accreditation p o r t i o n of M i s s o u r i bill SB 894, ad-
o p t e d i n M a y 2006, seemed aimed at increasing efficiency. School districts that were
u n a c c r e d i t e d w i t h i n the last 5 years and presently h a d o n l y p r o v i s i o n a l accreditation
w o u l d be a l l o w e d to ?lapse? (Education C o m m i s s i o n o f the States, 2010). This is
e q u i v a l e n t to the m a r k e t a l l o w i n g businesses to f a i l i f t h e y are n o t sufficientlye f -
f i c i e n t o r profitable. (Note that the bill also contained p r o v i s i o n s that allowed high
schools to certify students as ready to w o r k . )
Ethically Complex Arguments
As noted by Dunn (2004), certain stakeholders may consider a particular value ameans
to an end (extrinsic), but others may value that same attribute for its own sake ( n e
sic). For example, many mission statements produced by educators include the value 0
C h a p t e 8r * Make Recommendations 133
versity 45 4 means o l P r e Student performance, while others cite diversity asa

dive? outcome in and Of} sel. difference between considering values as essential
the
value? asa means to an end influences whether certain choices are negotiable or not.
jy
ofs i P onsidered to be intrinsic are non-negotiable, but this does not mean there is
yalues : way of achieving these principles.
only OF e decision aboutw h a t values are essential and what values are strategic is an
one. Patton and Sawicki (1993) provide an excellent summary of ethical analy-
__j
© and their summary undergirds much of this discussion. While a thorough treatise
s i r thical theory is beyond the scope of this text, it would be useful for you to reflect
of € on the ethicalb eliefs underlying your decisions. Think about the kinds of prin-
ly
o s you employ in justifying the choices that you make and the attention you pay to
Or ainpriorities. Are you more concerned with the outcomes of decisions than you are
w h the process used to reach those decisions? If you worry more about consequences
wi ou worry about process, whose consequences do you consider most important?
e you more worried about the impact of policy on your personal situation, on others,
or on society as a whole? Someof you may conclude that the consequences of the deci-
sion are not as important as making sure that you have followed a morally just process.
in other words, you are more concerned about right and wrong than you are about
penefit and harm. Others may reflect that both process and consequence are important
to the decision, and the emphasis on either is context driven.
is There O n e B e s t W a y ?
"
You may decide on a rule-based approach to decision making. This approach a v o i d s
the problem of h a v i n g too m a n y exceptions to the decisions that y o u support. I f ar u l e -
base approach is y o u r choice, you w i l l rely on y o u r ethical principles to develop u n i -
versal rules that guide y o u r decisions i n all situations. However, y o u m a y decide that
this sort of approach is too r i g i d and inappropriate f o r the complexities of the public
policy arena. You m a y o p t instead to rely on specific ethical principles to guide y o u r
decision i n particular situations. This decision may lead you to a more flexible approach
to decision making, b u t one where it m a y become more difficult to j u s t i f y y o u r choices
because of the n u m b e r of exceptions that m a y result. The complexity of p o l i c y analysis
often forces analysts to strike a balance between supporting policies where the ?end
justifies the means? and policies where ?rules rule.?
* Are you more concerned with the outcomes of decisions than you are with the process used to reach that
decision? Does the end justify the means?
* Ifyou worry more about consequences than you worry about process, whose consequences do you consider
important?
* Are you more worried about the impact of the policy on your personal situation?
* Are you more worried about the Impact of the policy on others? Who?
* Are you more worried about the impact of the policy on soclety as a whole?
* IS your main concem that you have followed a morally just process? In other words, are you more concemed
about right and wrong than you are about benefit and harm?
Fi
GURE 8 . 2 Reflective Q u e s t i o n s t o G r o u n d Y o u r Ethical Compass
134 C h a p t e8r * Make Recommendations
Public policy has n o h a r d a n d fast r u l e r e g a r d i n g the a p p r o p r i

t h a ta n a l y s t s s h o u l d follow. Patton and Sawicki (1993) o f f e rt h r e e g a s code of
Sthicg
(1) recognize an obligation to protect the basic t i g h t s o f others, (2)a c k n y r e l a y
sponsibility to support democraticprocesses,a n d (3) u p h o l d academica n d Wleg B e e
tegrity. Patton and Sawicki (1993) argue for ?thoughtful partisanshj ?w h e tsonal in
make explicit their assumptionsa n d biases (p. 41). However, P a t t o n and §v eanalyst
recognize that i n many instances, policy analysts are i n an expert-clientr e n .
w h i c h they may have the knowledge, b u t they do n o t have the finaldecision .P, in
authority. Even w h e n education leaders get to decide, they m a y still consult maki ;
decision makers to ensure that their decisions balance key perspectives. With Othe,
REFINE APPROACHES TO R E C O M M E N D A T I O N
When conducting policy analysis, you m u s t weigh options even if the politica)
process w i l l be the final arbiter. To address a p o l i c y issue, you can elicit a listo f s tl egal
tives and simply choose a policy option at random, b u t that approach isu n l i k e l tema.
persuasive to a broader audience. You can also satisfice, choosing the firsta lternoe®
that meets the basic requirements of solving the problem. A f t e r all, the constrain
t i m e and other resources may make it d i f f i c u l t for y o u to optimize i n thew a y ooh of
for b y m a n y economic models (March & Simon, 1958; Simon 1997). By satisficin ed
explicitly recognize the limits to collective decision m a k i n g and thatinvesting e a t

resources i n finding the one best solution may be unproductive. That is, if youreject ner
tions in y o u r quest to optimize, you m a y be constantly searching for perfection but Not
offering any policy action that is different from w h a t w a s done before (e.g., Colander
1991). By taking the first option that works, however, you m a y still find yourself won.
d e r i n g if a better choice could have w o r k e d w i t h i n existing constraints,
M a n y students are uncomfortable w i t h f o r m a l l y covering the steps of the policy
analytical process because they think it is a strategy to m a s k the subjective nature of
decision making. M u c h of the recent discourse on policy analytical studies rejects that
concern. Public policy scholars, by and large, do n o t claim that the process is objective
but argue instead for its transparency. Researchers generally agree that, despite the nor-
mative nature of the policy process, it can be i m p r o v e d b y transparent and systematic
analysis. M a n y policy researchers r i g h t l y note that ethical analysis is important because
it forces us to acknowledge where we and others stand regarding a policy issue. This
reckoning allows us to see what are disputes about facts and w h a t are arguments about
values (e.g., Denning, 2007; Patton & Sawicki, 1993), Education leaders need to be able
to distinguish between the two types of conflict to k n o w the p r o p e r persuasive tools. If
the argument is about the appropriateness of specific values, it is u n l i k e l y that gamer-
ing the facts sine qua non w i l l lead to substantive changes i n behavior.
Testing t h e Credibility of Your Recommendation
To alleviate a negative condition, change often m u s t take place. M a k i n g a recommen

dation regarding the fitting avenue for change requires decision makers (andanalyst
w h o advise them) to be persuasive that the change they prescribe w i l l lead toa bette
w o r l d . A good step in that process is to test y o u r recommendation againstr i v a l clan
You must be clear about the validity of your assumptions. Does the literaturea n d ven
fessional experience support a rival claim regarding the causal relationship b e t
C h a p t e 8r « Make Recommendations 135
» poes t e literatiand professional experience Support a

rival claim regarding the causal relationship
the outcomes desired and the actions prescribed?
petween
many informed researchers and stakeholders would agree with your assessment regarding the likely
e w t and effectiveness of the proposed policy? Is there general agreement in the field?
+ pid you exclude any legitimate costs and benefits?
«Have you considered stakeholder needs?
. Are other actions more responsive and appropriate to the policy issue identified?
» Are you clear about the ethical considerations that drive your decision?
» (sthe recommendation consistent with your stated ethical principles?
FIGURE 3.3 Questions to Test t h e Robustness o f Y o u r R e c o m m e n d a t i o n
the outcomes desired and the actions prescribed? Y o u also need to j u s t i f y the costs and
effectiveness you assume are associated w i t h the recommended action. H o w m a n y in-
formed researchers and stakeholders w o u l d agree w i t h y o u r assessment? D i d y o u ex-
clude any legitimate costs and benefits? Have y o u considered stakeholder needs? Were
any other actions more responsive a n d appropriate? A r e you clear about the ethical
considerations that d r i v e y o u r decision? Is the recommended action consistent w i t h
your stated ethical principles?
The case for going through this testing process is clear because policy analysis
rarely comes with undisputed alternatives (e.g., Dunn, 2004). Indeed, the existence of
multiple alternatives is the essence of defining a problematic condition as a policy issue.
The multiple ways to address policy problems makes it is essential to follow the policy
analytical process. In making recommendations, education leaders should be able to
test the robustness of their decisions in a variety of policy settings. One way to do this is
to consider, rather than ignore, conflicting claims and worldviews that may have gen-
erated different recommendations than the present recommendation process yielded.
The crux of policy analysis is to mitigate a nega- alternatives d o n o t u s u a l l y d o m i n a t e all crite-

live social condition. You must figure out how ria, you m u s t address trade-offs. Once y o u con-
to choose among several options. You can let sider m o r a l evaluations, you w i l l n o t f i n d an
the policymakers decide or let a court hand objectively r i g h t answer b u t y o u w i l l still face
low a legally binding decision, or you can coherent and incoherent arguments. Y o u m u s t
ormulate your own recommendation. If you be consistent w i t h i n the ethical f r a m e w o r k t h a t
ae responsible for making a recommendation, y o u establish. W h e n y o u h a v e i d e n t i f i e d the
You can decide on the alternatives by choosing alternative that has risen to the top, y o u m a y
car l y , optimizing, satisficing, using a score- r e c o m m e n d it f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . H o w y o u
strate or creating scenarios. Regardless of the choose to c o m m u n i c a t e t h a t r e c o m m e n d a t i o n
sion y employed, you must justify your deci- and persuade key stakeholders is the n e x t step
empin Justification must be based on both i n the p o l i c y a n a l y t i c a l process, a n d it is t h e
Pitical and normative arguments. Because subject of Chapter 9.
136 C h a p t e8r * Make Recommendations
a
Review Questions 4, Has y o u r i n i t i a l response to the
e appropriate role ter.
1. What do you t h i n k is th opening education vignette ch @P
m m e n d i n gp o l i c y reading this chapter? If so, in w h e t after

of policy analysts i n reco
your response has not changed, h o w ?I f
action? Why? _
2. W h a t are the e t h i c a l c o n c e r n si n e tw o u l d i n parallel the discussion on decisig It
dogs ;
u r policy recommen: ations: explored in this chapter? n Making

What will
factors
y o u choose a m o n g3
3, W h a t factors w i l l help
the alternatives described i n the chapter
opening educationv i g n e t t e ?W h y ?

cessation products (think Nicorette gum and Zyban |
National Post ( f / k / a The F nancial Post) (Canada)A p r i l
pills) Mr. Phillips studies ?harm reduction??get.
21, 2007 Saturday National Edition Where there?s
ting nicotine addicts unable to quit to at least o e
smoke: A U.S. professor has brought a storm of con-
to something less lethal than cigarettes: smokeless
troversy over tobacco funding to Alberta BYLINE:
products, such as chewing tobacco or snuff. ?
Kevin Libin, National Post SECTION: CANADA,; in Since arriving i n Edmonton in 2005, the sci-:
Calgary; Pg. A l 2 LENGTH: 1016 words entist has been a walking bull?s eye for anti-tobacco?
When Professor Carl Phillips relocated
g r o u p s crusading to push universities to ban to-
from the University of Texas to the University of
bacco money. ?We do not want to be a part of any-
Alberta [U of A], he brought with him two things:
a $1.5-million U.S. research grant and a stormo f thing that increases the social legitimacy and nor-
malization o f a product that technically should not
controversy. be on the market because it?s killing people,? says
The grant came courtesy of an American
Dr. Charl Els, a U of A psychiatrist and the Alberta:
tobacco company. The controversy [comes] from
director of Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada.
anti-tobacco groups that claim the funds sully the
Dr. Els forced the issue into the spotlight,
school?s reputation and want U of A to refuse re-
search funding from the corporations they oppose. when he applied for research funds from a feder-
Defenders of academic freedom argue that such ally funded organization last year (one adminis- ;
tered by a former colleague and fellow anti-tobacco 4
pressure groups are the real threat, undermining

activist). It required applicants to submit anoath |
the university tradition of academic freedom.
Corporate funding is standard business at signed b y their department's chair, promising not,
universities. Oil companies, consumer-goods mar- to accept funds from tobacco firms. Though Mr.?
keters, weapons manufacturers, all pay professors Phillips and his million tobacco dollars reside in the :
to research everything from climate change to the school of public health, not medicine, where Dr. 5,
effects of fluoride on rat testicles. The U of A grant works, his department chair neverthelessr e l
from U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co., is the best k i n d ? the pledge, disqualifying the doctor from the gran?;
?completely unrestricted,??says Mr. Phillips. ?It?s Whena local alternative newspaper caught wit i
for anything I want it to be. They have no control of the school's refusal to swear off tobacco mo
over what I do, let alone what methods I use or re- it suggested i n a March 15 article, the school nist? ;
sults that I get. In theory, I could use it to do re- becoming k n o w n as ?TobaccoUniversity. ally,
search on archaeology.? Days later, red-faced med schoolf a c
Actually, the Harvard-trained epidemiolo- hastily passed a policy outlawing tobacco
gist researches how to get smokers off cigarettes, a N o w Dr, Els wants the university to '0 0
popular area of inquiry among his colleagues. But and go further, p r o h i b i t i n g faculty memb 1d 0
while others mostly focus on the effectiveness of consulting to the industry. A t the next D0
C h a p t e 8r ¢ Make Recommendations 137
is meeting i n M a y , he says he hopes the Still, Mr. Phillips? critics insist tobacco money
gove a l enact ?a u n i v e r s i t y w i d e p o l i c y , sweep- puts researchers in a ?conflict of interest.? Les
wature, to c a p t u r e a l l research and a n y Hagen, executive director of Action on Smoking
poar
ing in ?
and Health (where Dr. Els is also a director) com-
other funding
But letting activists dictate research poli- pares it to accepting ?money from the Hell?s Angels
oe threatens the i n d e p e n d e n c e o f u n i v e r s i - to research organized crime.?
cies ©
hose primary function is the search for But Mr. Phillips wonders w h y it?s any dif-
ties through the conflict of ideas,? warns John ferent for scientists (such as Dr. Els) accepting
truth, 4 University of Toronto professor emeri- money from drug firms, which have a vested
Fure 4pastpresident of the Society for Academic interest i n the quitting industry and their o w n
tus om and Scholarship. ?It destroys academic checkered history of paying off scientists and
F r o m and, of course, when an entire depart- suppressing evidence of drug risks. I f anti-to-
er at leading university gives way to these ac-
a
bacco groups succeed today, Mr. Furedy w o r -
nist, their power to harm both epistemology and ries which unpopular industries w i l l be targeted
practice only increases.? tomorrow.
Attempts b y a n t i - s m o k i n g g r o u p s to con- M r . Phillips insists he is o n l y t r y i n g to f i n d
yince University of C a l i f o r n i a a d m i n i s t r a t o r s to ways o f getting smokers o f f cigarettes. I t j u s t so
block tobacco funds earlier this year were stymied happens that dozens o f p e e r - r e v i e w e d s t u d i e s
when professors there stood fast f o r unfettered in- demonstrate that smokeless tobacco is s i g n i f i c a n t l y
dence. ?This cuts to the heart of what our job safer than cigarettes for addicts w h o can?t q u i t the
?is all about,? says Mr. Phillips. ?It has to do with nicotine habit. (In Sweden i n recent decades, m i l - .
?freedom of inquiry, and having an opportunity to lions of smokers switched to a pouch-style s m o k e - -
* gay things, even though they may not be the most less tobacco called ?snus,? and rates of l u n g cancer,
f politically popular at the moment. All the things oral cancer and cardiovascular disease have p l u m -
that make the university, as a thousand-year-old meted to the lowest in Europe.)
[institution in the West, so critical.? Given the politically incorrect n a t u r e o f his
Mr. Phillips acknowledges the industry has w o r k , the i n d u s t r y is the o n l y place M r . P h i l l i p s
a dodgy scientific
history, suppressing evidence of says he has f o u n d f u n d i n g . B u t u n p o p u l a r o r
zsmoking risks. Still, U of A guidelines are clear: re- not, his research, he insists, m u s t be a l l o w e d to
- gardless of funding sources, researchers must
?apply proceed. ?I f u l l y accept the s t i p u l a t i o n that these °
fstringent standards of honesty and of scholarly and companies have done b a d things. B u t w e have to .
scientific practice in the collection, recording and keep o u r eye on the prize. The goal here isn?t to.
i analysis of data.? The school?s ethics
committee re- p u t Philip M o r r i s o u t of business. The goal is to .
tviewed and signed off on the smokeless grant. save people?s lives.?
j Source: Material reprinted w i t h thee x p r e s sp e r m i s s i o n of: ?National Post Inc.?
~ ~ .
1 Mentity the different alternatives facing the board 4, W h o should decide w h a t i n s t i t u t i o n a l p o l i c i e s

2 80vernors of the University of Alberta. are i n place regarding the acceptance o f grants?
tare the ethical concerns highlighted in the Why?
3, pe SPaper article? 5. I f you were advising the b o a r d of governors o n a
re do you think that Professor Phillips would policy for accepting grants, w h a t w o u l d y o u rec-
r e n to the questions in Figure 8.2? Would his ommend? Justify y o u r response.
Ponse differ from that given by Dr. Els in the
$ story? Explain your response.
Selected Websites
E d u c a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n o f the States. (2010). R e c e n t and policy. Under that tab isa link to e
f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . E d u c a t i o n leaders codeo f ethj
state p o l i c i e s /activities. R e t r i e v e d o n M a r c h 8, 2011,
from site helpful because the code canp r o v i de f i n this
t h e p r o c u r e m e n t s t r a t e g i e s t h a t w o u l d be ° dance on
h t t p : / w w w . e c s . o r g l e c s l e c s c a t . n s f lW e b S t a t e V i e w ? CO.
OpenView&Start=1&Count=306Collapse=1#1. ed by the group. While many education leadeTS
not be involved directly in purchasin ,
This p a r t o f the Education C o m m i s s i o n of the States site can help them reflect on the developmen
website lists recent state policy activities i n the t h a t u n d e r g i r d official recommendations
OF
rile
U n i t e d States. Education leaders m a y find this site
h e l p f u l because it reflects the education policy rec- The A m e r i c a n Society f o r Public Admin:
istration,
o m m e n d a t i o n s o f k e y policymakers across the coun- A v a i l a b l e at
try. In some cases, the description of the proposal
http:||www.aspanet.orglscriptcontentlindey
can p r o v i d e insight on the process used to find the
The official website of the AmericanSociety om
r e c o m m e n d a t i o n o r i n f o r m w h a t outcomes are likely
Public A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Members includei n d i
to emerge. w o r k i n g in o r s t u d y i n g p u b l i c service i n the as
N a t i o n a l Association of Educational Procurement. States. U n d e r the tab p r o v i d i n g generalinformate
Code of Ethics. A v a i l a b l e at about the organization is another tab that gives on
http:/www.naepnet.org. access to its code of ethics. Education leaders m e
The official website of the National Association of f i n d this site h e l p f u l because it provides another
Educational Procurement. Its members are primarily example of the code of ethics for a national organiza.
higher education purchasing officers i n the United tion. The code o f ethics m a y be helpful to education
States and Canada. O n the homepage, you can click leaders reflecting on the support that their recom.
on the tab that describes the organization. From that mendations m i g h t get f r o m the broader public ad-
point, you can access a description of its governance m i n i s t r a t i o n profession.
S e l e c t e d References
Colander, D . (1991). The best as the enemy of the M a r c h , J. G., & S i m o n , H. A. (1958). Organizations.
good. I n D a v i d Colander (Ed.), W h y aren?t econo- N e w Y o r k : John W i l e y .
mists as i m p o r t a n t as garbagemen? Essays on the This text is a classic in the field of organizational
state o f economics (pp. 31-37). A r m o n k , NY: Sharpe. theory. March and Simon examine important organi-
C o l a n d e r has c o m p i l e d essays that address the im- zational theories and look at how organizations and
portance o f n o n o p t i m a l solutions in public policy. the people within them actually work. They offered
Education leaders may find this chapter especially a less rationalized picture of how decisions are made
h e l p f u l as they t h i n k about recommending policy be- and policies recommended than the conventional
cause t h e y w i l l realize that perfection is not expected wisdom of that era. Education leaders may find this
f r o m their decisions. book interesting because it documents organiza:
tional features and captures the vagaries influencné
K i n g d o n , J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and
the decision-making process in organizations.
p u b l i c policies, (2nd ed.). N e w York: A d d i s o n
Wesley Longman. Schwartz, S. (2007, November 25).E thics
and the university. University World News.
K i n g d o n providesa classic examination o f h o w
Australia. Retrieved March 8, 2011, from
m u l t i p l e streams influence h o w decisions are made
http://www.universityworldnews.comvarticle
i n v a r i o u s p o l i c y arenas. Education leaders may find
this b o o k h e l p f u l because of the insight it provides php?story=20071122150953605. seal
o n p o l i c y and decision making. It also offers persua- Schwartz provides a thoughtful treatise on ther ?
j pou}
ofsocial
ics
it
sive explanations o n the impact of the decision-mak- ethics in the development and pursuit ki 0'©
i n g process o n the policies that are recommended. especially it applies to higher

as ins
education
C h a p t e8r ¢ Make Recommendations 139
__piights the potential trade-offs among ac- decision m a k i n g i n K i t z m i l l e r v. Dover. A m e r i c a n

b
sons HE e the individual, those that benefitthe Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 898-923.
gor that and those that benefit society as a whole.
Superfine identifies the tensions among judicial, scien-
. y e ders may find this article interesting be-
tific, and political decision making. The article offers
eat ors guidance on how they can develop an an examination of the answer to the question, Who de-
a u s t am ework that can inform moral action. cides? Education leaders may find this article interest-
fine, B. M- (2009, December). The evolving ing because of the perspective it provides on the fac-
tors that are important in determining which segment
s r t the courts i n educational policy: The ten-
10 petween j u d i c i a l , s c i e n t i f i c , a n d democratic of the collective is the appropriate arbiter of decisions.
sion
Persuade Your Audience
C H A P T E R OBJECTIVES

# Identify y o u r audience
® Describe and conduct policy arguments
= Identify the context in which the argument is most credible
# Communicate clear analysis
EDUCATION VIGNETTE
Y o u a r e t h e p r e s i d e n t o f a l e a d i n g r e s e a r c h a n d l a n d - g r a n t i n s t i t u t i o n in theU n i t e d
States. B u d g e t c u t s at the s t a t e level; the r i s i n g c o s t s o f a t t r a c t i n g l e a d i n g researchers,
e s p e c i a l l y i n the b i o m e d i c a l p r o g r a m s ; a n d l o w p e r s i s t e n c e r a t e s have forced you to
c o n s i d e r a variety o f s t r a t e g i c options. Y o u w a n t to raise the p r o f i l e o f y o u r institution by
e m p h a s i z i n g o u t s t a n d i n g r e s e a r c h a n d p u b l i c e n g a g e m e n t . H o w e v e r , k e y members of
the u r b a n c o m m u n i t y in w h i c h the m a i n c a m p u s is l o c a t e d i n c r e a s i n g l y express distrust
o f u n i v e r s i t y actions. Given y o u r d e s i r e to c u t c o s t s a n d raise the status o f the unlver-
sity, y o u h a v e d e c i d e d to eliminate the General College, w h i c h t e n d e d to attract poorer
s t u d e n t s a s well as t h o s e w h o s t r u g g l e d academically. Y o u f a c e a b a c k l a s h from some
i n the b r o a d e r c o m m u n i t y w h o fear that y o u r a c t i o n s will m a k e the institution more ax-
c l u s i v e a n d w h o c o n s i d e r the G e n e r a l C o l l e g e c l o s u r e a d e p a r t u r e f r o m the university's
o r i g i n a l mission. You have s e t u p a series o f f o r u m s d i r e c t e d a t d i f f e r e n t audiences to
e x p l a i n y o u r decision: the university c o m m u n i t y , h i g h s c h o o l advisers, a n d the commu-
n i t y a t large.
W h a t d o y o u tell t h e m ? D o y o u s a y the s a m e thing to t h e a u d i e n c e in each forum?
140
Chapter 9 © Persuade Y o u r A u d i e n c e 141
THE A R T O F C O M M U N I C A T I O N :
pefore you can implement a policy, you have to persuade relevant decision makers
about its suitability.I n a d d i t i o n to reaching a decision regarding the appropriate policy,
akey steP in policyanalysis is communicating that decision to key stakeholders (Bardach,
3009; Patton & Sawicki, 1993). This step differs somewhat from the second step identi-
fied in the policy analysis process. Making the case emphasizes assembling your data
in order to support your problem statement and alternatives. The step described in this
chapter looks more closely at communicating that information once the decision on
the appropriate policy strategy ismade. The focus of the two steps is different, so it is
helpful to discuss separately the skills that help education leaders excel in the different
ersuasive stages of the process.
Research b y Booth, Colomb, and W i l l i a m s (1995) and D u n n (2004) suggest t h a t
an important p a r t of c o m m u n i c a t i n g y o u r analysis is being aware o f the s t r u c t u r e o f
p o l i c y arguments; k n o w i n g the d i f f e r e n t modes of p o l i c y arguments; and, p e r h a p s

most important, u n d e r s t a n d i n g y o u r audience. Leach (2009, p. 2104) asserts that one
must have a ?strategic a t t i t u d e to communication.? She advocates translatingk n o w l -
edge gained f r o m m e d i c a l research into usable advice. She emphasizes the i m p o r t a n c e
of both doctors and patients v a l u i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n even if t h e y have d i f f e r e n t p r i -
orities. Leach (2009) writes that ?flourishing c o m m u n i c a t i o n relies on people v a l u i n g
both process a n d content, b o t h w h a t is said and h o w to say it? (p. 2104). She a d m o n -
ishes researchers f o r b e i n g n a r r o w l y concerned w i t h technical k n o w l e d g e a n d argues
that they must also be able to convey the practical implications of the research. Policy
analysts i n education m u s t translate their analysis into m e a n i n g f u l advice.P r e c e d i n g
chapters focused on the content of the analysis, what is said, b u t this chapter discusses
more f u l l y how to say it.
How t o C o n v e y Y o u r A n a l y s i s
The stereotype of an actor is that he prepares f o r his role b y first d e t e r m i n i n g the char-
acter?s motivation. For p o l i c y analysts, an i m p o r t a n t step i n p r e p a r i n g to c o m m u n i c a t e
your analysis is k n o w i n g y o u r audience. The advice offered b y Booth a n d his colleagues
regarding research i n general is relevant here. They h i g h l i g h t six basic questions t h a t
give researchers an i n s i g h t i n t o their readers:
1. Who is your audience?

2. What do they expect you to do for them?
* Provide a simple description of the problem in words that non-experts can understand.
* Be clear about the purpose of your presentation. Does It inform, advise, promote?
* Provide a roadmap of the presentation so readers know where you are going.
* Be factual and consistent.
* Define all abbreviations.
© Justify your claims,
* Tailor your presentation to the delivery format.
FIGURE 9.1 Basic Rules for Communicating Analysis

142 Chapter 9 ©
Persuade Y o u r Audience
3. How much do they know about your topic?

4. D o members of the audience already understand y o u r problem?
5. How will they respond to your proposed solution?
6. I n w h a t f o r u m w i l l t h e a u d i e n c e e n c o u n t e r y o u r r e p o r t ( B o o t h e t al., 1995 P 2 6 .
ac
. 2)
WHO IS YOUR AUDIENCE? Your audience may be large or small, in general a

or in conflict, decision makers or targets of the change. Its membersm a yineyement
policymaker who inquired about the policy issue, the stakeholders whoare a e
by the problem, the stakeholders who are affected by the change that YOu €cteq pr
and the teacher who asked you to conduct the analysis. Regardless of the n a e
you must summarize the problem in a descriptive statement that isgrounder
facts. You must present a simple description of the problem in words that hon in
perts can understand. If you cannot summarize the policy issue in 30 words o r e
you yourself may not be convinced that you have captured its essence. o f ?ss,
Thi
role as education leader. Would you be able to articulate the heart of theproble o e
the community you lead? Examples of succinct problem descriptions comefrom a
press releases issued by the White House, state education departments,and other
education organizations.
EXPECTATIONS OF AUDIENCE. The parts of y o u r analysis that you present will differ
d e p e n d i n g on the expectations of y o u r audience. A u d i e n c e members may want you
to solve the problem f o r them, give t h e m ideas on h o w to solve the problem, Ptes-
e n t i n f o r m a t i o n , o r s i m p l y rubber-stamp the s o l u t i o n that t h e y favor. Policy schol-
ars describe the balance that analysts m u s t attain i n the presentation of their analysis,
The presentation m u s t often contain sufficient i n f o r m a t i o n to help the audience make
sense of the recommendation w i t h o u t m a k i n g them feel that t h e i r i n p u t is superfluous,
Such a balance is seldom an easy task to accomplish. For example, theMinneapolis
p u b l i c schools faced a large budget shortfall, school closings, and district offices that
p o l i c y m a k e r s considered to be u n w e l c o m i n g to the c o m m u n i t y at large. Within that
context, Minneapolis school board members considered the options of doing nothing
d i f f e r e n t , refurbishing their existing b u i l d i n g offices, o r m o v i n g to another location,
They decided to invite public i n p u t into their decision. D u r i n g that process, however,
strong criticism surfaced among some in the c o m m u n i t y that the board had already
opted to move and that the c o m m u n i t y f o r u m s w e r e s i m p l y p r o forma. Instead of the
f o r u m s leading to more unity between members o f the c o m m u n i t y and members of
the administration, it created another failure to communicate. One lesson to be learned
f r o m this Minneapolis public schools scenario is that y o u need to be clear about the
purpose of y o u r presentation. Do n o t raise expectations that you cannot fulfill.I f you
are merely presenting information, do n o t frame the presentation as if the analysis s
ongoing. I f y o u are i n v i t i n g c o m m u n i t y i n p u t , m a k e it clear h o w that input will be
integrated into the final decision. Be transparent.
AUDIENCE KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING. W h e n r e v i e w i n g the facts foryour

analysis, you w i l l learn a l o t about the topic. You m u s t decide h o w much of this uw
f o r m a t i o n is already k n o w n b y the audience and h o w m u c h you w i l l have toim p a r t
Bardach (2009) warns against presenting too much b a c k g r o u n d information.H o w
if y o u r audience members are relatively ignorant about the k e y factors underlying y°
Chapter9 © Persuade Your Audience 143
alysis, YOum u s t give them enoughinformation to understand your point. Do not use
peeviatOn w i t h o u t first p r o v i d i n g a definition. A v o i d phrases like ?as you all k n o w
bb pecause they m a y n o t know. W h i l e you do not want to talk d o w n to the audience,
469
do not w a n t to share every fact that y o u learned or technical detail that y o u
you \o yed. A general rule of t h u m b is that you should provide more foundational infor-
em onif the audience is n o t f a m i l i a r w i t h the topic. Your presentation style m a y d i f f e r
w hdifferent audience expectations, b u t y o u r facts should be the same. Do n o t contra-
fic yourself. That is, w h i l e you m a y emphasize different facts w i t h different groups,
satin things differently is n o t a license for you to misrepresent reality. For example,
do not tell the local c h a m b e r o f commerce that y o u oppose teacher tenure and then
meet with the teacher unions and i n f o r m them that y o u support tenure completely.
AUDIENCE RESPONSE TO THE SOLUTION. The justifications that you adopt for the p r o b -
jem depend on h o w m u c h s u p p o r t or opposition you anticipate from key stakeholders.
The more that people need to b e convinced, the more justification you m u s t p r o v i d e
regarding your p r o b l e m definition and proposed solution. I f you are presenting to an
audience whose members w a n t e d another problem tackled o r w h o disagree w i t h y o u r
osition regarding w h y the problem exists, you m u s t meet their concerns head on. Y o u
may not convince everyone, b u t y o u have to address all major concerns. For a m i x e d
crowd (or an u n k n o w n one), at the v e r y least, y o u must havea clear problem statement
with three basic ?so w h a t ? p o i n t s provided. These points should be based on argu-
ments taken from different points of justifications.
AUDIENCE FORUM. I f y o u are presenting your analysis orally, you m a y have an o p p o r -

tunity to read body language o r to take questions from audience members. I f you have
only the written w o r d to communicate your concepts, you w i l l not have the chance to
explain any ambiguous claims. In either case, state y o u r assertions simply. Use visual il-
lustrations of y o u r m a i n points to ensure a quick, summative illustration of y o u r analy-
sis. Be careful that what you say i n pictures matches what you say w i t h words. W h i l e
the key elements o f y o u r presentation w i l l be the same, the finished product w i l l l o o k
different depending on the needs of the audience. When possible, tailor y o u r presenta-
tion to the audience. Use these questions and others that you find applicable to g u i d e
your presentation design: (1) D o you have a homogenous audience or a diverse one?
(2) Are you preparing a complete report or an abridged version? and (3) D o you have a
lot of time or just a little i n w h i c h to present analysis?
HOMOGENOUS OR DIVERSE. A r e y o u presenting y o u r recommendations to a c o m m u -

nity forum or to an academic conference? If you are presenting to a c o m m u n i t y f o r u m ,
you w i l l likely have a broad range o f interests and knowledge. Indicate w h a t y o u r con-
clusions mean for the c o m m u n i t y ; describe explicit c o m m u n i t y impacts. I f you are pre-
senting to an academic conference, audience members may be more homogeneous in
?it support of academic and peer-reviewed journals. Detail the implications of your
analysis for the field and for future research.
P E T E OR ABRIDGED ANALYSIS. A r e you w r i t i n g a report for y o u r bosso r sending

dentine?t h e editor? When completing a f u l l analytical report, youm u s t p r o v i d e suffi-
edit Ormation on the steps leading to the conclusion drawn. In w r i t i n g a letter to the
St, you have less space. Go directly to the p o i n t and state y o u r conclusion.
144 Chapter9 © Persuade Y o u r Audience
TIME. Do you have 5 minutes to state your case in front of alegislative com...
whole-day workshop? Legislators wouldl i k e l y be interested in the shortvers or
analysis. State your recommendations and indicate how they compare to TSion of yo n
tions made in similar communities. If you have a whole day to Teco
Present €Nda.
you have more time to lay out the steps in the process and the conclusionsthat Ysig
OUdre,?
drew
M a k i n g the Policy A r g u m e n t
Just as audiences m a y differ, the arguments used to persuade them w i l l al

D u n n (2004, pp. 395-418) identifies 11 m a i n types o f p o l i c y arguments: s o differ
method, generalization, classification, cause, sign, m o t i v a t i o n ,i n t u i t i o n , analon t t ;
allel case, and ethics. These justifications are n o t m u t u a l l y exclusive, and iti s ihe Par.
y o u w i l l m i x and match these p o l i c y arguments to enhance y o u r ability to ely that
your audience about the conclusions that y o u have drawn. Petsuade
AUTHORITY. Reasoning f r o m a u t h o r i t y is the social science equivalent of name dr

ping. By citing those ?in the know,? y o u l e n d c r e d i b i l i t y to the claims that you Op-
a n d offer the audience some assurance that y o u r analysis is n o t simply based on
opinion. Using arguments of a u t h o r i t y are required w h e n presenting to an audde
knowledgeable about the field and m a y be especially useful at an academic c o n e
ence or other forums f o r scholars. I f y o u r audience members do n o t place muchcre
dence in the experts y o u cite, y o u r arguments are n o t l i k e l y to be persuasive.Findin
the appropriate experts m a y be especially d i f f i c u l t i f y o u are presenting to an aude
ence w i t h mixed k n o w l e d g e and interest i n the topic. I n that case, you can rely on ?ex
pertise b y association? b y relying on the use of peer-reviewed journals or onpower
brokers w i t h i n that c o m m u n i t y . Sometimes u n i v e r s i t y personnel seem out of touch
and lose the support of the broader c o m m u n i t y b y referring to the ?wrong? experts
w h e n j u s t i f y i n g the decisions that t h e y make.
METHOD. I f who you k n o w does n o t w o r k as a means o f persuasion, how you know

might. M a k i n g your argument by indicating that y o u r assertions are based on knowl-
edge gained from tried-and-true techniques m a y be helpful. Being able to match the
methods that you use w i t h the questions that y o u p u r s u e is important (Heck, 2004,
p-192). For instance, you m a y not be able to capture the nuances of a phenomenon and
w h y it exists if you rely solely on statistical techniques. In describing the increased use
of statistical analysis in the definition of educational adequacy, Guthrie and Rothstein
(1999) write that statistical methods can obfuscate the practical implications of research
findings. The authors assert that the precision of complex, statistically derivedresults
m a y give its authors a false sense of security and still n o t be persuasive to their au-
dience. They state, ?We prefer the professional j u d g m e n t approach, not because We
believe it is more precise than statistical or inferential methods (it m a y not be more pre
cise) b u t rather because its imprecision is more transparent? (p.231). Consequently,
you rely on a method that is not suited for the questions that you ask or the conclusions
that you draw, your arguments w i l l n o t be convincing.
.
f
GENERALIZATION. The underlying rationale when using generalizationa s 4 mode °.
argument is that what is true of the parts is also true of the whole. This assertionsection
ible if the parts are randomly selected from a broader population. Random 5¢
C h a p t e9r * Persuade Your Audience 145
Te pee e e e e e e ~ y
Modes of Making PersuasivePolicy Arguments
a
e m Essence o f A r g u m e n t
rype of Argument C o n t e x t in W h i c h M o d e Is M o s t C r e d i b l e
Name dropping; reference t o those Audience is knowledgeable about the field,

Authority
?in the know? or experts. especially those at academic conferences.
Authority of experts is context driven.
H o w you know matters Appropriately matching the methods t h a t
Method
you use to the questions t h a t you address;
for example, using qualitative analysis for
answering why a phenomenon exists or h o w
a process works.
Generalization What is true of the parts is true of the Credible assertion if parts are randomly
whole selected from a broader population.
Classification W h a t is true of the whole is true of Credible only if there is no variation among
the parts the parts. The more diversity, the less credible
the assertion and the more offensive the
arguments may seem. Mode susceptible t o
accusations of stereotyping.
Cause Established causal relationships Assertion more credible if lots o f empirical
evidence exists to support existence o f
relationships. For example, the basis of
economic analysis is the relationship between
price and the quantity demanded or supplied
,
Of a good or service.
Sign Indicators of a problem Credible if there is empirical evidence t h a t
an association exists between indicators and
the problem that is defined. Unlike causal
arguments, there is no need to g o beyond
simple associations.
Motivation ,
Appeal t o values held b y stakeholders Arguments are more credible the more it
addresses the values of audience members.
intuition Persuasion by insight Arguments are more credible if hard facts
are less valued than the experience of players
w h o are similar in characteristics t o the
audience members.
Analogy Drawing comparisons between Credible if the metaphor rings true in
relationships in other contexts different policy arena.
Parallel case Highlights the possibility of effective Arguments are more credible the more
policies working within the same closely the original location resembles the
system but outside original new location where the policy is t o be tried.
implementation location
Ethics Persuasion by motivation by appealing Arguments are more credible the more
to principles of a just society homogeneous the concept of w h a t a just
society looks like.
146 Chapter9 © Persuade Your Audience
suggests that analysis of each part would yield the same results as analysis of the wh
Notwithstanding, because your conclusionsare based on a sample and not the ol
tion, some will reject your line of argument by finding an exception toy o u rc l a n P k
claim will be more robust if you follow research guidelines regarding sampling ori OL
provide so-called thick descriptions that allow people to make similar connections t 0
case outlined. For instance, in exploring the organizational capacity of states to res a
to the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), Alexander (2006) justified loon
conditions in Massachusetts as a way to reveal conditions for the rest of the co 8a
She assumed that if Massachusetts had difficulty responding to the act, thenman ?oth
states would face similar challenges. She argued that the challenges wouldb e pat e
larly acute for some states because federal educators considered Massachusetts tohe c t
only 17 states in 2005 to be on track to meet the NCLB standards. 0
CLASSIFICATION. Classification is akin to stereotyping because y o u reason thatwhatis

true f o r the p o p u l a t i o n on average m u s t also be true of i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n thatpopula.
tion. Be careful w h e n u s i n g arguments relying on this m o d e of reasoning because
can be offensive. I f you rely on classification to persuade y o u r audience, state explicitly
that y o u are aware that m a n y i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n the g r o u p do n o t share the group's ay-
erage attributes. M a n y examples abound o f presentations a n d analyses being Tejected
because of perceived stereotyping. For instance, a single mother, w h o happened to be
w h i t e , professional, and wealthy, complained o f the dire predictions made in the schol-
arship regarding the fate of children i n single-family households. Similarly, a black pro-
fessional objected to students o f color being labeled ?at risk.? I have often seen research-
ers use black interchangeably w i t h poor as if all black students are poor and all white
students are rich.
CAUSE. W i t h the cause mode o f persuasion, y o u try to persuade the audience about
the soundness of y o u r arguments by r e l y i n g on established causal relationships. This
mode of reasoning is m o r e persuasive the more empirical evidence that exists in sup-
p o r t of the presumed relationship. For example, general agreement exists that there
is an inverse relationship between the price of a good a n d the quantity demanded of
it. Thus, you m a y decide to rely on this economic ?law? to persuade decision makers
to offer scholarships in the sciences in order to increase the n u m b e r of students who
specialize i n that field. Advocates of many federally sponsored programs designed to
encourage students to enter the science, technology, engineering, and math fields took
this approach.
SIGN. You can try to persuade stakeholders that a problem exists b y referring to the i n
dicators, o r signs, of a problem. This persuasive tool is useful because you do nothave
to convince y o u r readers of the causal connection b u t s i m p l y that an association exists.
For example, Singham (1998) argued as early as 1998 that the performance of black stu-
dents is a harbinger of the performance o f the system as a whole. H e writes,
I t used to be that coal miners took canaries into the mines as detectorso f
noxious gases. If the canary died, then the miners realized that they were in
a region of danger and took the necessary precautions. The educational p e r
formance of the black c o m m u n i t y is like the canary, and the coal mine is the
education system. The warning signals are apparent. (p. 8)
C h a p t e9r ©
Persuade Your Audience 147
jon. With the motivation mode of persuasion, you persuade by appealin

v O the values held by stakeholders. The history of education in theU n i t e d states
direc ates the plethorao f a r g u m e n t s that have been used to encourage support for a
jpustt o f education strategies. O v e r the decades, policymakers have alternatively em-
v e d equity, excellence, and liberty (e.g., Fowler, 2009; Heck, 2004). The title of the
p i e c i l d Left Behind Acti llustrates an attempt to motivate stakeholders both from an
No" and excellence standpoint. The duality of the arguments used to promote this act
ea lected in the bipartisan support it received when it passed in 2002 and the biparti-
sato pposition to it today.
yTvITION. The intuition mode of persuasion is persuasion by insight. In this day

data-driven management, however, it may be less persuasive to rely on your gut
alone. Notwithstanding, in some contexts, especially when the people involved feel
peleaguered, thei n s i g h t offered from someone in the trenches can be more persuasive
an hard facts. I t is n o t u n u s u a l to hear teachers reject the authoritative o r m e t h o d
arguments offered b y researchers w h i l e embracing the guidance offered f r o m one o f
their own.
anacocy. W i t h the analogy mode o f persuasion, y o u try to persuade y o u r audience

b y drawing on the i m p a c t of relationships i n other contexts. This strategy is e m p l o y e d
by many w h o propose market-based policies i n the field of education. They argue that,
because the market can allocate resources efficiently i n the exchange of private goods,
market mechanisms w i l l be equally successful i n allocating resources i n the f i e l d of
education. This line o f reasoning dominates m u c h o f the federal and state policies that
have been enacted since the 1990s. For example, market-driven policies have helped to
spark a trend where states no longer serve as the p r i m a r y source o f f u n d i n g f o r public
higher education institutions and m a n y leaders of public higher education institutions
pursue marketing strategies that seem similar to their private counterparts (American
Council on Education, 2005).
PARALLEL CASE. Persuasion using parallel arguments highlights the possibility o f ef-
fective policies w o r k i n g outside their original i m p l e m e n t a t i o n location (Dunn, 2004,
p. 396). Policymakers often l o o k to their neighbors f o r ideas. For example, U.S. p o l i c y -
makers often p o i n t to the longer time spent i n school by students i n other i n d u s t r i a l -
ized countries as a reason for them o u t p e r f o r m i n g students i n the U n i t e d States. The
policymakers argue that the increased school time allows students from other coun-
tries to score h i g h e r than U.S. students on the T h i r d International M a t h a n d Science
tests, These arguments underlie the federal Time for Innovation Matters i n Education
(TIME) Act of 2008, w h i c h proposes federal f u n d i n g to support states? efforts to ex-
pand the school day in p i l o t schools i n each state.
ETHICS. Persuasion using ethics is similar to persuasion by motivation, b u t it goes be-

yond the values held b y i n d i v i d u a l s o r groups and to the presumed principles of a just
society (e.g., D u n n , 2004, p. 396). When you rely on ethical arguments to justify y o u r
conclusion, you are persuading b y describing ?the righmess or wrongness, goodness
o rbadness, of policies o r their consequences? (Dunn, 2004, p. 396). For example, w h e n
President George W. Bush expounded on the benefits of the N o C h i l d Left Behind Act,
he urged U.S. citizens to abandon the ?soft b i g o t r y of l o w expectations,?

ethical principles, Houston (2007) counterst h a t Also Using ~
[we should end] ?the hard bigotry of inadequate resources? by develo;

a Marshall Plan for America?s poor that provides adequate health ve Ping
preschool programs for those in need and creates ?human enterprisensand
where large numbers of poor children live. (p. 747) Zones?
CHECKLIST FOR C O M M U N I C A T I N G A N A L Y S I S
The preceding sections of this chapter focus on p r e p a r i n g f o r the presentati

keb y k n o w .
ing y o u r audience and using appropriate arguments. T h i s section is a chec On thep r =
sentation itself. You should ask yourself the f o l l o w i n g six questions as a f i n a l test tose
if you are prepared to communicate y o u r analysis clearly:
. Is your preparation and presentation of the materials timely?

. Are the major findings of your analysis clear?
. Is the presentation of information engaging?
Do you use visual displays?
. Is the conclusion succinct and obvious?
. Are the policy and research implications identified?
Timeliness
The factor of time refers both to having the report ready b y the deadline established
and also presenting the information w i t h i n the time p e r i o d specified. The audience ma
or m a y n o t recognize that there is a lot to cover, b u t it is y o u r responsibility to gather
analyze, and report the facts w i t h i n the time p e r i o d allotted. H a v i n g a wealth ofinfor-
mation at your fingertips is meaningless if it cannot be used. While it m a y seem unfair
that you have to cover one year?s w o r t h of w o r k i n one m o n t h (or whatever the short-
ened timeframe), you w i l l k n o w that beforehand. Dive into the p o l i c y analytical process
u s i n g the guidance presented herein to help you decide w h a t tasks m a y be omitted and
w h a t tasks are necessary. Maybe you m a y havea lot to say and w o u l d love more than
10 minutes (or whatever the allotted time) to say it, b u t practice y o u r presentation and
cut it if you are over the allotted time. The key to u n d e r s t a n d i n g y o u r analysis may be
lost if you d i d n o t present essential i n f o r m a t i o n because y o u ran o u t of time.
Clarity o f Findings
Be explicit. The audience members should not have to guess o r infer the conclusions
that y o u d r a w . Audience members s h o u l d be able to f o l l o w the logic of your argu:
ments, even if they do not agree w i t h it. Sometimes a picture o r graphillustratesyour
p o i n t clearly and quickly. Illustrations also serve to change the pace of thepresentabon
and often a l l o w it to be more engaging. However, do n o t use pictures for the sake 0
s h o w i n g pictures. Their purpose is to m o v e the presentation and the analysis along: |
Your presentation must havea clear, concise identification of the policy issue WIfe
s u p p o r t i n g evidence. While time constraints m a y prevent y o u from doing 4 comp?
stakeholder analysis, you should be clear about w h o are the major winners a? l
Identify the factors that helped you to reach y o u r decision. Offer y o u r audience so @
C h a p t e 9r ¢ Persuade Y o u r A u d i e n c e 149
e Ismypreparation and presentation of the materials timely?
«Are the major findings of my issue paper clear?

« [site presentationengaging?
« pid |use visualdisplays?
» isthe conclusion clear andsuccinct?
« Are policy and research implications highlighted?
FIGURE 9.2 Checklist for Communicating Analysis
Janation of the significance of each criterion and its measurement. Provide a clear de-
scription of the alternativest h a t you considered, indicating how you compared them.
When preparing your presentation, try it with people who are not familiar w i t h the topic.
For that practice presentation, ask them to tell you which option rose to the top. If their re-
sponse is the same as your conclusion, your findings and arguments are sufficiently clear.
So W h a t ?
Let the a u d i e n c e k n o w w h e r e t h e y s h o u l d g o f r o m here. H i g h l i g h t the i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r
p o l i c y and research s t e m m i n g f r o m y o u r analysis. D e p e n d i n g o n the audience, y o u
m a y conclude w i t h f u t u r e tasks, o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c h a n g e s t h a t m a y r e s u l t , o r e v e n u n a n -
swered questions in research.
Chapter Summary
Before you can implementa policy, you have tell them depends on w h a t t h e y a l r e a d y k n o w
to persuade relevant decision makers about its a n d the f o r u m i n w h i c h y o u p r e s e n t y o u r
suitability. A key step in policy analysis, in ad- analysis. T a i l o r y o u r presentation to f i t t h e i r
dition to reaching a decision regarding the ap- needs. I t is n o t enough to k n o w y o u r audience
propriate policy, is communicating that decision and prepare a p p r o p r i a t e arguments; y o u also
to key stakeholders. Previous chapters focused have to be timely. Your analysis m u s t be ready
on the content of the analysis. Chapter 9 looked i n t i m e and d e l i v e r e d w i t h i n the t i m e g i v e n .
more closely at h o w you communicate that For y o u r analysis to be useful, its c o n c l u s i o n s
content in order to get things done. Knowing m u s t be clear. W h e n y o u have c o n v i n c e d t h e
your audience and constructing strong justifi- relevant stakeholders on the s u i t a b i l i t y o f y o u r
cations for the claims made are important per- p o l i c y option, you are n o w ready to t h i n k m o r e
suasive tools. Your audience may be large or deeply about its i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . The c r e a t i o n
small, in general agreement or in conflict, deci- o f an i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p l a n is t h e s u b j e c t o f
sion makers or targets of the change. What you Chapter 10.
S e e
Review Questions
1. Do you think drawing the ?right? conclu- communicating your analysis to a broader
Sion in policy analysis is as important as audience? Explain your answer.
2. W h i c h o f the m o d e s o f a r g u m e n t d e s c r i b e d 3. Return to the chapter-opening educ

ati
gnette. I d e n t i f y a n d analyze the q:
i n C h a p t e r 9 do you t h i n k is the most per-

suasive? W h i c h mode do you tend to use in dience g r o u p i n g s that w i l l be a e e r e n t au.
y o u r professional life? forums. W h a t kinds of argument w Nt at the
use f o r each group? W h y ? o u l d You
News Story for Analysis 7
?Board to review closing schools; Falling Enrollment.? directives aimed at k e e p i n g the board fina.
<.,
National Post ( f / k / a The Financial Post) (Canada). viable w h i l e p r o v i d i n g q u a l i t y education ancially

O c t o b e r 29, 2009 T h u r s d a y . T o r o n t o Edition. L a s t w e e k , h e c a l l e d f o r the c
Teation of ,
BYLINE: Kenyon Wallace, National Post. SECTION: an all-boys l e a r n i n g a c a d e m y and b.

T O R O N T O ; Pg. A12. LENGTH: 523 words Oy-friendly !
classrooms to c o m b a t h i g h male Suspension rates :

T o r o n t o District School Board [TDSB] trust- and b e h a v i o r a l p r o b l e m s . H e also announced -
ees voted u n a n i m o u s l y last night to begin a review his i n t e n t i o n to h i r e a m a r k e t i n g manager to re.
o f potential school closures and mergers in the face c r u i t students f r o m p r i v a t e schools and foreign :
o f d r a m a t i c declines i n enrollment expected d u r i n g countries.

the next 10 years.
Board data s h o w elementary school enroll-
The board w i l l launch ?accommodation re- ment, c u r r e n t l y at 177,000, is projected to drop by
view committees? for 36 schools in eight neighbor- 30,000 to 60,000 students b y 2030,
hoods as part of education director Chris Spence?s ?The reality is that we have about 100 schools
plan to eliminate under-used schools and bring that are half empty,? said Josh Matlow, trustee for
scattered student populations together, allowing St. Paul's. ?That isn?t b e i n g fiscally responsible «
for more class choices and extracurricular activi- w i t h ratepayer tax dollars because it costs the same
ties. Any savings expected from school closures a m o u n t o f m o n e y to keep the lights on, pay for.
will also help the board tackle its $90 million capi- gas a n d p a y salaries i n these schools as it does in 4
tal deficit. full schools. I f y o u w a n ta better school, you have }
?These r e v i e w s don?t necessarily mean to deal w i t h the reality that y o u can?t have it half i
s c h o o ! closures,? said b o a r d c h a i r m a n John }
empty.? ?
C a m p b e l l . ?They may make a recommendation The last school to close i n the TDSB was
f o r consolidation and even i f a school does close, T i m o t h y Eaton Business and Technical Institutei n
it is a t e m p o r a r y state o f affairs and i n some cases,
Scarborough, w h i c h was s h u t this year aftere n r o l l - {
doesn?t mean the school w o u l d be sold.?
ment fell to 200 (capacity was 750). |
M r . C a m p b e l l cited the example of three Not all trustees are sold on the review com-
schools in his o w n ward (Etobicoke Centre) that were mittees, however. Sheila Cary-Meagher (Beaches- |
closed i n the late 1980s and early 1990s but were re- East York) says people who live in lower income?
opened as a result o f changing demographics. neighborhoods often don?t have the knowledge o :f
A c c o m m o d a t i o n review committees take the how the school system works or the language skills,
f o r m o f p u b l i c f o r u m s where trustees, parents and necessary to express their concerns over potential
j
o t h e r stakeholders discuss the role of a local school
school closures. al
i n their c o m m u n i t y and w h a t i m p a c t its closure ?I have put the director on notice that! w!
w o u l d have o n students and the neighborhood. be insisting that we provide each of these comm? ;
The p l a n to strike committees this f a l l ? w i t h
nities with an organizer who can work with is |
m o r e slated for J a n u a r y ? i s one o f dozens of pro- lies and residents to help give them the too? " 4
posed i n i t i a t i v e s p u t forward by Mr. Spence as part do a competent job of making recommendations, i
o f his a m b i t i o u s ?Vision of Hope!?, a broad set of she said.
Source: M a t e r i a l reprinted w i t h the express permission of: ?National Post Inc.? 4
~ Q e ? e e
Chapter 9 © Persuade Your Audience 151
piscussion Questions
the different audiences faced by the ed-
ane
3. W o u l d the m o d e of a r g u m e n t used d i f f e r based

1. pes e a d e r s identified i n this article. y t h e ed on the audience? Explain y o u r response.
u a ould y o u c o m m u n i c a t e f a v o r e d policies
How w i
audience group that you described in
to each
Question 1?
piscussion
a 7
. ~
_ -? a
selected W e b s i t e s
the press releases under the tab labeled News Room
American Council on Education. A v a i l a b l e at
found on the homepage.
tyawnnsn.acenet oGulAMITemplatescim ?Section=
T i m e f o r I n n o v a t i o n M a t t e r s in E d u c a t i o n A c t o f
About ACE-
t h eofficial website o f the A m e r i c a n C o u n c i l on 2008. A v a i l a b l e a t
ducation (ACE). Its m e m b e r s i n c l u d e the leaders of
httpliour govtrackauslcongressloil.xpA7HiI=S110-
accreditedh i g h e r education institutions and affili- 31,
ated higher education organizations i n the U n i t e d
This website tracks the progress of the Time for
tates. The site provides r e v i e w s of existing p o l i c y Innovation Matters in Education Act of 2008. It con-
as well a policy briefs related to higher education
tains the full text of the bill as well as its current sta-
inthe United States. Education leaders may find this tus in Congress. Educators may find this site helpful
cite helpful because of its in-depth look at policyt h a t
for the information it provides on this particular bill
affects higher education institutions. Especially help- as well as the insight it gives on paralle! arguments
ful are the publications made available under the tab
used to justify it.
labeled Government Relations and Public Policy and
selected R e f e r e n c e s
H o u s t o n , P. D . (2007, J u n e ) . T h e s e v e n d e a d l y s i n s
American Council o n Education. (2005, March). o f N o C h i l d L e f t B e h i n d . P h i D e l t a K a p p a n , 88(10),
Bridging troubled waters: Competition, cooperation
p p . 744-748.
and the public good i n independent and p u b l i c higher
Houston is the executive director o f theA m e r i c a n
education. ( T h i r d i n a series o f essays: The changing
Association of School Administrators and was criti-
relationship between States a n d their institutions.)
cal o f the strategies adopted by the N o C h i l d L e f t
Washington, DC: A m e r i c a n C o u n c i l on Education.
Behind Act. He wanted to persuadep o l i c y m a k e r s
and other education leaders that the act was so badly
This report, published by the American Council on
Education, details the trends in context and policy flawed that they should not support even a m o d i f i e d
faced by leaders of higher education institutions
version of it. Education leaders may find this article
in the United States. Education leaders in higher helpful for examining the ethical mode of argument
education institutions may find this report espe- employed to persuade policymakers that maj or
dally helpful for its description of the changing policy revision is needed.
role that states play in supporting higher education L e a c h , J. (2009, J u n e 2 0 - 2 6 ) . V a l u i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n .
institutions and how education leaders respond to The L a n c e t , 373(9681), 2104.
these changes, The insight it provides on how the
Leach argues for the art of communicating details,
language and values of business gets increasingly indicating that this competence is often overlooked in
incorporated in the education discourse may be the quest for honing technical skills. Education lead-
insightful as leaders consider how they can commu- ers may find this article helpful because it highlights
nicate with different audiences.
152 Chapter9 ©
Persuade Your Audience
t h e importance of being able to persuade and commu- help reduce the gap. Education lead
nicate even in a content-driven field like medicine. article interesting for its use of signs a e a w Find thi
Singham, M. (1998, September). The canary in the making a policy argument. Singhama r g u e Ode of
mine: The achievement gap between black and poor performance of black students is 5 Spat the
white students [cover story]. Phi Delta Kappan, of the poor performance of the education - OMatic
80(1), 8-15. whole. He also uses the analogy of the Ystem asa
mine to make his point. canary in the
This article examines the achievement gap between
white and black students, offering strategies that can

Policy Analysis For Educational Leaders A Step-By-step Approach

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Policy Analysis For Educational Leaders A Step-By-step Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The A y n & Bacon Educational Leadershign Series

POLICY ANALYSIS FOR

N i c o l a A. Alexander (Ph.D., U n i v e r s i t y at A l b a n y ) is an Associate Professor i n the

RATIONALE FOR THIS TEXT

mentation, monitoring, and evaluation. I hope that, on reading Policy Analysisfor eg ©

step because, i f the decision-making process is covert and intuitive, it is m o r e likely to

Policy Analysis f o r Educational Leaders: A Step-by-Step Approach is the culmination of years

Chapter 1 Laying t h e Groundwork 1

Chapter 2 G e t t i n g Started at t h e B e g i n n i n g : T h i n k i n g o f Policy

W h y Should Leaders Study Policy Analysis? 2

The Role o f Persuasion 2

W h y Use This Text? 5

Forecasting, Prescribing, Monitoring, Evaluating 7 .

Chapter 2. GETTING STARTED A T THE B E G I N N I N G : T H I N K I N G OF

Policy Analysis Versus Policy Making 32

Stages o f t h e Policy-Making Process 35

Going Beyond Evaluation 40

Chapter 3 T A K I N G T H E F I R S T STEP: D E F I N E THE P R O B L E M 48

Chapter 4 M A K E THE C A S E B Y A S S E M B L I N G THE E V I D E N C E 64

People and Documents are Key 72

H o w t o Categorize Types o f Data 73

W h a t Are t h e Specific Criteria That Frame

W h a t Factors I n f l u e n c e t h e Political A c c e p t a b i l i t y o f Policy? 93

Chapter 6 DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES 101

Policy Types 107

System C h a n g e Policies 109

News Story f o r Analysis 111

Chapter 7 WEIGH THE OPTIONS: EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES 115

Education Vignette 115

Anticipating the Future 117

Packaging Y o u r Alternatives 121

Distinguishing A m o n g Alternatives 121

Evaluating Alternatives: The Single-Step, Norm-Based

Evaluating Alternatives: The Two-Step, Criterion-Based

Chapter 8 MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS 128

Education Leader as Researcher, Bureaucrat, o r Entrepreneur? 130

Ethically Complex Arguments 132

Chapter 9 PERSUADE YOUR AUDIENCE 140

Aupience Forum 143

Making the Policy Argument 144

Checklist f o r Communicating Analysis 148

Clarity of Findings 148

C h a p t e r 10 IMPLEMENT THE SOLUTION 153

Implementing Strategically 158

Implementation Proper 160

Evaluating Versus M o n i t o r i n g 179

Types a n d Purposes o f Evaluation 180

Summative Evaluations 180

Approaches t o Evaluation 181

Analytical Considerations 183

Make RECOMMENDATIONS 196

PeRSUADE YOUR AUDIENCE 196

Chapter Summary 197

PULLOUT FIELD G U I D E FOR E D U C A T I O N A L LEADERS: S U M M A R Y

After reading t h i s chapter, y o u w i l l be able to:

= Describe w h y policy analysis is i m p o r t a n t for education leaders

# List the basic principles of policy analysis

W H Y SHOULD LEADERS S T U D Y POLICY A N A L Y S I S ?

Players on t h e Leadership Landscape

T h e l e a d e r s h i p landscape is f i l l e d w i t h c o m p l i c a t i o n s . L e a d e r s m u s t v o i c e ideas, cony,

W h a t Policy Analysis Can D o

of thesei n s t i t u t i o n s a r e able to r e l y on the a u t h o r i t y of t h e i r p o s i t i o n to get t h i n g s

Administrators, policymakers, and academics m a y be interested i n different stages o f