4. New Localism vs. Centralism: The New DEEL Paper presented at the British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Annual International Conference, 2010. Dr. Valerie A. Storey Associate Professor Director Doctoral Programs, Educational Leadership

5. Abstract Educational leaders in the United States are faced with the paradox of seeking stability in turbulent times while endeavouring to implement centralized initiatives with the purpose of improving localized social good. This paper attempts to wrestle with the inconsistencies within the paradox and provides a framework grounded on a new movement in educational leadership called The New DEEL (Democratic Ethical Educational Leadership) which aims to change the direction of educational administration away from an overly corporate and controlling model towards the values of democratic and ethical behaviour. Gross & Shapiro, 2005

6.  U.S. Congress  U. S. Department of Education The Role of State Government  State Legislatures  State Departments of Education The Role of Local Government  Local School Boards The Role of Federal Government

7. (De)Centralism Education in the United States Education in the United States highly decentralized the locality is the central point of responsibility and implementation The constraints of increased national and state prescriptiveness in education policy making are pulling local educators even more fully into the special details and nuances of their own particular contexts (Henig & Stone, 2008). This resurgence is a refocusing of attention upon local districts, communities, and neighbourhoods in the context of national and even global educational objectives (Crowson & Goldring, 2010).

8. New Localism At the core of the New Localism is an emerging paradox - while the state and federal mandates in education strengthen centrally, the nation’s prime attention under these mandates is determined locally (Crowson & Goldring, 2010). Grounding support in response to the need to provide local solutions to national complex problems is characterized by “New Localism” (Storey & Farrar, 2010). This agenda is not restricted to education. Crowson & Goldring (2010) identify four (4) impacting forces: (1)an updated approach to devolution, amid a framework of national standards; (2) a strengthened back-to-the-neighbourhoods movement with school-community partnerships in learning much in mind; (3)a new appreciation of interest in family choice and expressions of lifestyle in education; (4)a societal expression of some increasing concerns and/or fears regarding American education, expressed most frequently at the levels of school-site community.

9. Issue in the U.S Issue in the U.S. How does a local community ensure that capacities and capabilities are enhanced in the support of learning when faced with an increasingly centralized, top- down control regime, modelled after corporations (foundations & venture philanthropists)?

10. Federal Repositioning: An Escalating Influence Constitution-Tenth Amendment limits the role of the federal government Constitution-Tenth Amendment limits the role of the federal government People of the U.S. expect the federal government to work with the states in protecting their rights and providing for their needs. When the states prove unable to meet the needs or protect the rights of the citizens, the federal government steps in. People of the U.S. expect the federal government to work with the states in protecting their rights and providing for their needs. When the states prove unable to meet the needs or protect the rights of the citizens, the federal government steps in. Strong evidence that the federal government has transitioned from a supportive role to a major influence of K-12 policy (Cohen-Vogel, 2005; Kaestle, 2006; Manna, 2006). Strong evidence that the federal government has transitioned from a supportive role to a major influence of K-12 policy (Cohen-Vogel, 2005; Kaestle, 2006; Manna, 2006). Public pressure began to build for a larger federal role beginning in the late 1980s as evidence mounted that the public school system was in trouble eventually resulting in NCLB which “created a new educational federalism in the United States” (McGuinn, 2006 ). Public pressure began to build for a larger federal role beginning in the late 1980s as evidence mounted that the public school system was in trouble eventually resulting in NCLB which “created a new educational federalism in the United States” (McGuinn, 2006 ). The No Child Left behind Act (NCLB), 2001 changed the federal government's role in K-12 education by focusing on school success as measured by student achievement. The No Child Left behind Act (NCLB), 2001 changed the federal government's role in K-12 education by focusing on school success as measured by student achievement.

11. Foundations in Education: Escalating Policy Influence Philanthropic giving is playing a catalytic role in current school reform efforts and helping to set the nation’s education agenda (Hess, 2005). I998, top four foundations contributing to elementary and secondary schooling Annenberg Foundation Annenberg Foundation Lilly Endowment Lilly Endowment David and Lucile Packard Foundation David and Lucile Packard Foundation W. K. Kellogg Foundation. W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Provided 30% of funds contributed by the top fifty donors. 2002 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Walton Family Foundation Walton Family Foundation Provided 25% of funds contributed by the top fifty donors. Venture philanthropies began with different emphases, over time they have converged in support of reform strategies such as competition, choice, deregulation, incentives, and other market-based approaches.

12. Current Contextual Framework in the U.S. Race to the Top program $4.35 billion of funding, under sections 14005 and 14006 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). U.S. Department of Education set aside $350 million for a competition focused on enhancing standards and assessments, improving the collection and use of data, increasing teacher effectiveness, achieving equity in teacher distribution, turning around struggling schools, improve school reform, and the quality of assessments. The U.S. Department of Education will make awards in two phases. First phase of funding- awarded in spring 2010 Won by the small state of Delaware who will be eligible for $107 million & the state of Tennessee who will be eligible for $502 million provided by Congress to drive education reform. More than $3.4 billion remains to fund successful states in phase two. Second phase of funding- applications from 35 states and the District of Columbia. Between the current phase and the first phase, which drew 41 applications, 47 states have applied to this program.

13. Impact on State Policy Critical Decisions-Whether to Ease limits on autonomous public charter schools, revamp teacher pay and evaluation, expand the collection of student achievement data and take other steps in line with Obama's agenda. Adopt the newly created common standards. Proponents of the common standards argue that a shared set of learning expectations is needed to remedy state-to-state variations in standards, which leave too many students unprepared for productive futures (Gewertz, 2010). Opponents see the effort as an attempt to nationalize education decisions, a perception fuelled by federal incentives to adopt the common standards. State adoption of the standards is also a requirement of Race to the Top grant competition which favours states that adopt the standards by August 2 nd.

14. A Shifting Paradox: New Localism Re-emerging interest in the role of localism in American education which has been occurring directly alongside the more recent emphasis upon national standards, state and federal mandates, and international comparisons of gains in student achievement (Cohen-Vogel & Rutledge, 2010; Crowson & Goldring, 2010; Bransford et al., 2000). New sense of localism may very much be a product of recent policy solutions which rely upon local market forces, family choices, individuals’ responses to performance incentives, and school site-sanctions as key levers for quality improvement (Cohen et al., 2007). Federal and state mandates are determined through the locally framed responses to accountability pressures by leaders, teachers, and parents in individual schools. Under New Localism, schools for the most part have the flexibility to work out how to exceed the bar set for them by state and federal officials. (Henig & Stone, 2008)

15. The New DEEL 2005-University faculty and school practitioners in the U.S. launched a new movement, known as New DEEL (Democratic Ethical Educational Leadership) with the intent to change the direction of the field away from an overly corporate and controlling model towards the values of democratic and ethical behaviour (Gross & Shapiro, 2005). 2005-University faculty and school practitioners in the U.S. launched a new movement, known as New DEEL (Democratic Ethical Educational Leadership) with the intent to change the direction of the field away from an overly corporate and controlling model towards the values of democratic and ethical behaviour (Gross & Shapiro, 2005). The New DEEL Center at Temple University Philadelphia is part of an international partnership with similar centers in Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, and Sweden. The New DEEL Center at Temple University Philadelphia is part of an international partnership with similar centers in Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, and Sweden. New DEEL places the spotlight firmly on ethical democratic leaders who have the skills to succeed in the political climate of accountability rather than on the role of educational managers (Cate, 2005; Shapiro, 2005). New DEEL places the spotlight firmly on ethical democratic leaders who have the skills to succeed in the political climate of accountability rather than on the role of educational managers (Cate, 2005; Shapiro, 2005).

16. The New DEEL’s vision: Promotes democratic life growing from the heart of the community toward the wide world. Promotes democratic life growing from the heart of the community toward the wide world. Included in the New DEEL perspective are the skills of community building, deep ethical understanding, a theoretical and practical knowledge of turbulence driven by the internal desire to lead from an ever- expanding sense of mission and responsibility Included in the New DEEL perspective are the skills of community building, deep ethical understanding, a theoretical and practical knowledge of turbulence driven by the internal desire to lead from an ever- expanding sense of mission and responsibility. The New DEEL’s mission statement: The mission of the New DEEL is to create an action-oriented partnership, dedicated to inquiry into the nature and practice of democratic, ethical educational leadership through sustained processes of open dialogue, right to voice, community inclusion, and responsible participation toward the common good. The mission of the New DEEL is to create an action-oriented partnership, dedicated to inquiry into the nature and practice of democratic, ethical educational leadership through sustained processes of open dialogue, right to voice, community inclusion, and responsible participation toward the common good. We strive to create an environment to facilitate democratic ethical decision- making in educational theory and practice which acts in the best interest of all students (Gross & Shapiro, 2005). We strive to create an environment to facilitate democratic ethical decision- making in educational theory and practice which acts in the best interest of all students (Gross & Shapiro, 2005).

17. CONCLUSION The debate over federal centralism versus localism is at the heart of the matter with the arguments as to whether or not a centrally planned and more corporate model of education is the “way of the future” or is New Localism the path. The New DEEL represents a democratic grass-roots “power to the people” movement believing in the notion that excellence in education is a function of the community of individuals it is part of. It is a student- centered endeavour in which actions and decisions are guided by the principle of “what is best for students”.

18. References Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Commission on Behavioural and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Cate, J. M. (2005) The IDEALS: A democratically principled leader. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of University Council of Educational Administration, Nashville, TN. CNN.com (2007). Des Moines Register Presidential Debate – Democrats, Dec. 13, 2007. Retrieved on June 22, 2010 from, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0712/13/se.01.html Cohen, D.K., Moffitt, S.L., & Goldin, S. (2007). Policy and practice: The dilemma. American Journal of Education, 113(4), 515-548. Cohen-Vogel, L. (2005). Federal role in teacher quality: “Redefinition” or policy alignment? Educational Policy, 19 (1), 18- 43. Cohen-Vogel, L., & K., Ingle (2007). When neighbours matter most: Innovation, diffusion and state policy adoption in tertiary education. Journal of Education Policy, 22(3), 241-262. Cohen-Vogel, L., & Rutledge, S. (2009). The pushes and pulls of New Localism: School-level instructional arrangements, instructional resources, and family-community partnerships in R. L. Crowson & Goldring, E.B. (Eds.) The New Localism in American Education (pp.70-104 ) National Society for the Study of Education, 2009 Yearbook. Crowson, R.L., & Goldring, E. B. (Eds.) (2009). The New Localism in American Education. National Society for the Study of Education, 2009 Yearbook.

19. References Gross, S.J., & Shapiro, J.P. (2005). Our new era requires a New DEEL. Towards democratic ethical educational leadership. The UCEA Review. Henig, J.R., & Stone, C.N. (2008). Rethinking school reform: The distraction of dogma and the potential for a new politics of progressive pragmatism. American Journal of Education, 114 (3), 191-218. Rothman, R. (Ed.) (2007). City schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools. New York: Teachers College Press. Shapiro, J.P. (2005). Control versus democracy: A paradox at the center of democratic ethical educational leadership (New DEEL). Paper presented at the symposium, The New DEEL: Towards Justice and Beyond. Annual Convention of the University Council of Educational Administration. Nov 10-13,, 2005, Nashville, TN. Storey, V.A., & Beeman, T. (2006). A New DEEL for an old problem: Social justice at the core. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 10 (33). Storey, V.A., & Farrar, M. (2009). The New Localism in the UK: Community governance amid national goals in R. L. Crowson & Goldring, E.B. (Eds.) The New Localism in American Education (pp.25-47 ) National Society for the Study of Education, 2009 Yearbook.