STATE TAKEOVERS OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS: A CORRELATIONAL STUDY

The purpose of this mixed methods study was to investigate federal and state accountability policies and the relation between school district accountability and school district resources. No Child Left Behind (2001) (NCLB) and Public Law 107-110 developed a federal accountability system that basically compared historically marginalized students with affluent students (Mintrop & Trujillo, 2005). Therefore, NCLB sets high achievement rates equal to the ability of affluent students (Mintrop & Trujillo, 2005). In addition, NCLB required State Education Agencies (SEA’s) to develop a state plan with standardized assessments as in the case for the North Forest Independent School District and other unacceptable school districts taken over by the Texas Education Agency. The study answered the following two research questions: 1. How are federal and state school and district accountability policies defined? 2. What is the relation between school district accreditation and school district resources? During the process of answering questions one and two, the relation between school district accountability and student economic backgrounds emerged as an important finding. Chapter four added the following research questions: 3. What is the relation between school district accountability and economically disadvantaged students? 4. What are the relation s between school district accountability and the enrollment percentage of race? a. African American b. Hispanic c. White To answer the first research question a literature review was conducted on federal and state accountability policy theory. The review of federal policy focused on the No Child Left Behind used to define federal accountability policy and the effects of federal policy on school takeovers (Elmore, 2010, 1996; Fowler, 2008; Fuhrman, 1999; Garfield, Garfield, & Willardson, 2003; Kingdon, 2011; O’Day, 2002; Public Law 107-110; Wirt & Kirst, 2009). The literature on state school accountability policy was reviewed to define state accountability policy and the effects of state accountability policy on school closures (TEC 39, 2011). The answer to the first research question lies in the framework and a timetable for federal school accountability polices that were developed. However, state policies are based on federal accountability policies requiring states to develop state assessment instruments (NCLB, 2011); consequently state accountability polices were grounded in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 39 (TEC). To answer research question two, correlational methods were used to identify the relation between school district accountability and school district resources. In addition, the relation s between school district accountability and student economic backgrounds and school district accountability and race were explored Archival data for Texas accountability were retrieved from the Texas Education Agency Accountability Rating System (AEIS). School district resource data were retrieved from the Texas Education Agency School Finance Reports and Data. Correlational analyses were conducted between the 45 Texas Exemplary school districts and the 50 Texas Academically Unacceptable school districts. Correlational relations were measured for accountability ratings and Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA), accountability ratings and the percentage of disadvantaged students, and accountability ratings and race. The most significant relation found was a -0.745 between the accountability ratings and economically disadvantaged students. Generally, the findings may imply that poverty continues to be the major source of the achievement gap as measured by school district accountability ratings.Curriculum and Instruction, Department o