Abstract
Confounded policy and adhocracy provided useful frameworks for analyzing this study of one district implementing federal Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) while simultaneously giving sites flexibility. Professionals creatively met student needs appropriate for their sites, found resources, and negotiated new role and task assignments. But site decision making provided an unsatisfactory structure for managing IDEA, creating ambiguities. The need for district office leadership, centralized personnel and policy management, and equitable practice monitoring was highlighted in day-to-day confusion over decision-making responsibility. What state tests should special education students take? Who deals with African American boys being shuffled into special education? Which federal policy assumes priority when several policies conflict? Similar questions were in the everyday context and may reflect confounded policy situations beyond this district and particular policies explored in this case. Finally, this analysis draws implications for theoretical exploration of adhocracy, for policy implementation, and for cautions about site-based management.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
