View/Open - Drake University

C~ll-l-icululn directors in pallicular haw great value in
coll~crs;iliu~ls" ail11 other professionals also charsed nfith policy implementation. "We could
fi~~lrr out \vhal Was meant and how we might be able to do thinns.'. stated one educat
These hey ;ldmini~tmti\~e participants look their time before rushing to pass the word of
illlpending mand:ites to their collea~ues. as they "nrere not alarays hearing the same
messages." Some degree of frustration was expressed in all three districts with the on
;ipin/c?fi again nature of the legislative interpretations. Pragmatic educators fell into a "tell
me \%.hat I need to do" mentality focusins more on the task than the process. "There were
some bumps in the road early on." stated one superintendent. It was through these problems
that the ahilitv to make it a "meaningful document" for rhe district was realized.
For all panicipants. \.due was seen in the previous school improvement work districts
had done in establishing \\,orking comn~unity groups. nvriting standards and benchmarks. and
.joining quhiect-specific study teams. This a.as consistent with the findings of Clune (2001).
;~nll Il;lnn;i\\.;~! ;~ntl Kimball (2001 I in [hat succecs \\.3s built on pre-existing reform efforts of
111' I ')S( I\. \\ it11 con1 inuit\. hcr\t.een thc r\t,o time periodc pro\.ing crucial. "Past esperience in
r~liv-111 \\;I\ ;I \Ironc prcdiclor (,fcurrent quccecs" ~ p. 169). Each of these districts had
ac~rkin~ \r.h(~,l in~pr(nrmcnt plan\ in place prior to HF 2271. I'one had been developed u'ith
..' ,]LI\~ ullllconr slack in rcom somewhere matins a decision that no One can buy in I@."
"~\'~r!~onc hnr n lo1 of ownenhip in [he schml impmvement plan." stated one curriculum
clireclor. Tr;ln\fc~rnl:l~ion;ll
lenders build commitment in their teachin: staffs.
I>clicr\ ;IhOul ~c:lr~ling :,"d lcnming. ;Ind c-eale a virion of \tVhnt the schml district can kcocome
( scrpicl\.;rnni. I LI~O). \jrtlen the ne\tS m;lndnlrs of HF 2272 u'ere presented
administraton.