Date of Award

Spring 4-2017

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Department

Education

First Advisor

Dr. Julie Williams

Second Advisor

Dr. Sherry DeVore

Third Advisor

Dr. Terry Reid

Abstract

here are very few studies on the views of school administrators and state legislators regarding federal government mandates for schools. Bolman and Deal (2015) believed people align themselves to survive and thrive in the political framework where resources are scarce, and the aspects of power and conflict inform decisions (Douglas & Mehra, 2015; Pourrajab & Ghani, 2016). This study focused on the thought processes of both school administrators who implement federal mandates and state legislators who navigate funding for federal mandates. Leaders of the political parties of Missouri and school administrators were interviewed to gain insight into the motivation and political views which drive decision making at the state and local levels. The findings of this investigation indicated opinions varied widely on the nature of federal government involvement in education, and political party affiliation had some influence on the belief systems of the participants interviewed. This affiliation runs deep in today’s politics and may be difficult to overcome. Data from the study clearly indicated public school administrators favored funding for preschool education yet did not support charter school expansion. Findings from the study offer more than a few implications for both administrative and legislative practice. Administrative interview data could be used to inform legislative decisions for public schools. Bipartisan conversations among stakeholders may offer common ground on these topics for the benefit of Missouri students.

Rights

Copyright 2017

Download

Share

COinS