AEIS Policy vs. Site-Based Management: Research Agenda Implications.

This paper examines the problems of centralized academic-indicator systems in light of the move toward site-based management. Problems with current practice are examined in the framework of critical inquiry. Alternatives to current accountability guidelines are presented that harmonize positivism with critical inquiry, while respecting both local and state needs for accountability information. The paper uses a focused synthesis methodology (Majcharzak 1984) of policy research to examine the paradox of "statist-centralized" data collection (Clune 1993) in the presence of decentralized decision making. The Texas Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS), a centralized assessment device, and its role as an economic model for school assessment are described. The paper next discusses the legislative incarnation of Texas' site-based management, followed by a discussion on how local management can ameliorate problems associated with employing a strictly economic model of school assessment. Finally, recommendations are offered for conducting research practices at the local level that respect the value-laden nature of local needs while continuing to embrace a positivistic approach that appeases major stakeholders. A conclusion is that the AEIS can provide only snapshot data for Texas schools. The information gleaned from the AEIS data provide general direction for educational improvement, but do little to guide specific interventions at the classroom level. Site-based management creates a forum for local practitioners to gather and discuss, through critical inquiry, the creation and validation of locally developed measures of student success. (Contains 14 references.) (LMI)